Simon Ambler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The following compiler error occurred in trying to compile Jan
Zwanenburg's proof assistant tool Yarrow with ghc-4.00.
ftp://fpt.win.tue.nl/pub/courses/2L560/yarrow/yarrow-src.tar.gz
The package says that it works with ghc-2.05 but I thought
At 05:12 -0600 1998/11/24, Jan Skibinski wrote:
To paraphrase George Orwell, "All reductions are equal, but some are
more equal than others."
...
So are assembly language instructions. Yet, I could think about
some average instruction size for similarly written programs.
Naive as my question
If neither the reduction count nor the timing are appriopriate
measures of efficiency in Hugs, then what is? Is there any
profiling tool available for the interpreter?
Since modern CPU's are developed as to make more commonly used assembler
instructions faster, the only way to find out
At 09:49 -0600 1998/11/24, Jan Skibinski wrote:
Since modern CPU's are developed as to make more commonly used assembler
instructions faster, the only way to find out the speed of the components
of a program is to use a profiler.
Looks like you missed my last question:
"Is there
...(continued)...
Sorry, I forgot to include my references:
[1]
@InProceedings{oka95b,
author = "Chris Okasaki",
title ="Purely functional random-access lists",
pages ="86--95",
booktitle ="Conference Record of FPCA '95",
year = 1995,
publisher =
Hi Mark,
To paraphrase George Orwell, "All reductions are equal, but some are
more equal than others."
:-)
So are assembly language instructions. Yet, I could think about
some average instruction size for similarly written programs.
Naive as my question might have been, I asked it anyway
in
which of those data structures would give me the best
response time?
There is no simple answer to that question. It depends on how you
use it and what implementation you're going to use.
Set up a typical usage scenario and test it on the platform
you are going to use it on, that's
So are assembly language instructions. Yet, I could think about
some average instruction size for similarly written programs.
Do you mean `time' rather than `size'?
If you do, then you can get rather wrong results when considering
assembly language since the concept of timing an individual
On Tue, 24 Nov 1998, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
So are assembly language instructions. Yet, I could think about
some average instruction size for similarly written programs.
Do you mean `time' rather than `size'?
Sorry, I meant 'time'.
..
I'm not sure what you're trying to
