Hello,
I'm measuring performance of the insertion operation of red-black
trees. For input, three kinds of [Int] are prepared: the increasing
the order, decreasing order, and random.
The random case is 4 or 5 times slower than the others. I'm afraid
that my program also measured the cost of
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Kazu Yamamoto k...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hello,
I'm measuring performance of the insertion operation of red-black
trees. For input, three kinds of [Int] are prepared: the increasing
the order, decreasing order, and random.
The random case is 4 or 5 times slower
On 19 October 2011 19:21, Gregory Collins g...@gregorycollins.net wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Kazu Yamamoto k...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hello,
I'm measuring performance of the insertion operation of red-black
trees. For input, three kinds of [Int] are prepared: the increasing
the
Conrad Parker wrote:
On 15 October 2011 23:18, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic
ivan.miljeno...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 October 2011 01:15, Bas van Dijk v.dijk@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that you shouldn't use ByteStrings or Vectors of Word8s for
Unicode strings. However I can imagine that for quick
On 19 October 2011 22:09, Roman Leshchinskiy r...@cse.unsw.edu.au wrote:
So it seems that (1) people have very different requirements and (2) the
Show instance only really matters for debugging in ghci. Here is a
thought. What if ghci allowed Show instances to be overridden dynamically?
So
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Roman Leshchinskiy r...@cse.unsw.edu.au
wrote:
So it seems that (1) people have very different requirements and (2) the
Show instance only really matters for debugging in ghci. Here is a
thought. What if ghci allowed Show instances to be overridden
On 17 October 2011 11:56, Luis Cabellos cabel...@ifca.unican.es wrote:
My own library is available at https://github.com/HIPERFIT/hopencl and
will be released on hackage very soon (next week probably). Please
take a look at it. It is currently tested on x86_64 Linux with both
the AMD
On Oct 19, 2011, at 7:32 AM, Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 19 October 2011 22:09, Roman Leshchinskiy r...@cse.unsw.edu.au wrote:
So it seems that (1) people have very different requirements and (2) the
Show instance only really matters for debugging in ghci. Here is a
thought. What if
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Kazu Yamamoto k...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hello,
I'm measuring performance of the insertion operation of red-black
trees. For input, three kinds of [Int] are prepared: the increasing
the order, decreasing order, and random.
The random case is 4 or 5 times
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 08:18:17PM +0200, Nicu Ionita wrote:
Am 18.10.2011 18:53, schrieb Stephen Tetley:
Haskell has no support for reflection whatsoever.
It can support compile time meta-programming with Template Haskell.
Reflection itself might be antagonistic to functional programming,
On 19 October 2011 15:59, AM age...@themactionfaction.com wrote:
Note that other programming languages have had to solve this exact problem
and they usually end up with multiple functions- one for debugging, one for
serialization, one for displaying how the object was constructed.
As per
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Stephen Tetley
stephen.tet...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 October 2011 15:59, AM age...@themactionfaction.com wrote:
Note that other programming languages have had to solve this exact problem
and they usually end up with multiple functions- one for debugging, one
John Lask wrote:
This is literate code. It expounds on your initial question and provides
two solutions based either on the StateArrow or Automaton
(Remainder omitted.)
John,
Thanks so much for your help!
I'm going to study your example code and try to understand how the
Automaton implicit
Ivan Lazar Miljenovic wrote:
On 19 October 2011 22:09, Roman Leshchinskiy r...@cse.unsw.edu.au wrote:
So it seems that (1) people have very different requirements and (2) the
Show instance only really matters for debugging in ghci. Here is a
thought. What if ghci allowed Show instances to be
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com wrote:
It does. You need to use evaluate to have ensure actually be evaluated.
I'm almost certain you're wrong about this. The bang pattern on the
return from ensure (!r1 - ensure $ ...) forces r1 to WHNF, which goes
through
Michael Snoyman mich...@snoyman.com writes:
sense to try and pursue something like what you're suggesting, but I
think the default Show (Vector Word8) should be the one most useful,
most of the time, and I think the general consensus seems to be the
current ByteString instance fits that role.
On 19 October 2011 17:03, Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com wrote:
Have a look at:
https://github.com/tibbe/unordered-containers/blob/master/benchmarks/Benchmarks.hs
I see you use the (evaluate . rnf) composition.
I also used it in:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Gregory Collins
g...@gregorycollins.netwrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com
wrote:
It does. You need to use evaluate to have ensure actually be evaluated.
I'm almost certain you're wrong about this. The bang
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 21:21:48 +0200, Gregory Collins
g...@gregorycollins.net wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Johan Tibell johan.tib...@gmail.com
wrote:
It does. You need to use evaluate to have ensure actually be evaluated.
I'm almost certain you're wrong about this. The bang
On 20/10/2011 5:11 AM, Captain Freako wrote:
for your use case then, the StateArrow seems more appropriate as it
provides you with the final state. Ofcourse the Automaton arrow could
also be used:
liftAu' f s0 = proc x - do
rec (y,s') - arr f - (x,s)
s - delay s0 - s'
Greg,
The code looks ok to me -- you've deepseq'ed the list, and forcing it
to whnf should force the deepseq. Also, criterion runs your benchmark
many times, if your code was measuring the RNG time it would only
happen once. This would show up in the criterion output as an
unusually large
Welcome to issue 204 of the HWN, a newsletter covering developments in
the Haskell community. This release covers the week of October 9 to 15,
2011.
You can find the HTML version of this issue at:
http://contemplatecode.blogspot.com/2011/10/haskell-weekly-news-issue-204.html
New and Updated
Thanks, John. I think I understand what you've done, below.
However, it's made me realize that I don't understand something about
your original code:
When the `liftAu' function was only returning `y', how were we able to
get `(y, a)' out of it, when we called it from `runAuto'?
Thanks,
-db
On
One more question on the `runAuto' code, John:
If I understand the code correctly, `f' is an arrow. Yet, we're using
it on the right side of `=' in a simple assignment. How are we getting
away with that?
Thanks,
-db
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:02 PM, John Lask jvl...@hotmail.com wrote:
On
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Captain Freako capn.fre...@gmail.comwrote:
One more question on the `runAuto' code, John:
If I understand the code correctly, `f' is an arrow. Yet, we're using
it on the right side of `=' in a simple assignment. How are we getting
away with that?
Thanks,
25 matches
Mail list logo
