To my benchmark proposal with the determinant programs
Juergen Pfitzenmaier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
> The setting for the suggested benchmark needs some clarification. For
> a dense matrix of sufficient size haskell should be able to beat C.
> I think Sergey knows this and therefor didn't
"S.D.Mechveliani" wrote:
[snip]
> And why the dense matrix representation is better for Haskell?
> Rather i would expect it is the sparse one.
I really don't think this kind of comparison is going to be very meaningful.
I've written some sparse matrix code in C myself. Since memory is often
as im
Sergey Mechveliani wrote:
> Maybe we arrange some simple and clear benchmark?
The setting for the suggested benchmark needs some clarification. For
a dense matrix of sufficient size haskell should be able to beat C.
I think Sergey knows this and therefor didn't mention a benchmark
involving a spa
Many times in this list people said that Haskell is in-efficient in
comparison to non-functional tools, like C and others.
And often refer to the matrix operations, linear algebra tasks,
saying how the arrays are useful and how they need to be mutable.
Maybe we arrange some simple and clear bench
