I piped the output of fasta (with N=250,000) into the entries on the
wiki [2] which I compiled with 'ghc -O2'. Watching with 'top', I saw
over 400MB of RSIZE by the end. So perhaps I am benchmarking wrong,
since this is the same memory usage as the original reverse-compliment
entry, and roughly t
I've added an entry on the hawiki[1] for the regex-dna benchmark, and
posted a smaller (down to 15 lines), faster entry for
[2]reverse-complement, using string indexing from Alex.
Cheers,
Don
[1] http://haskell.org/hawiki/ShootoutEntry
[2] http://haskell.org/hawiki/ReverseComplementEntry
On 1/4/06, Chris Kuklewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
> > On 1/4/06, Josh Goldfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Keep in mind that the shootout requires that the first 30 permutations
> >>printed out by the Fannkuch benchmark to be exactly those given in the
> >>"ex
On 1/4/06, Chris Kuklewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
> > On 1/4/06, Josh Goldfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Keep in mind that the shootout requires that the first 30 permutations
> >>printed out by the Fannkuch benchmark to be exactly those given in the
> >>"ex
Hello Josh,
Wednesday, January 04, 2006, 6:00:16 AM, you wrote:
JG> I was able to significantly speed up the code by replacing the flip
function with a function that relies entirely on pattern matching (no splitAts
or reverses). It looks ugly, though:
JG> mangle list@(1:xs) = list
JG> mangle
Sebastian Sylvan wrote:
> On 1/4/06, Josh Goldfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Keep in mind that the shootout requires that the first 30 permutations
>>printed out by the Fannkuch benchmark to be exactly those given in the
>>"example."
>
>
> Well I'm one step closer to just not caring about
On 1/4/06, Josh Goldfoot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Keep in mind that the shootout requires that the first 30 permutations
> printed out by the Fannkuch benchmark to be exactly those given in the
> "example."
Well I'm one step closer to just not caring about the shootout anymore.
The spec say
I was surprised to learn that indexed insertion:
permutations (x:xs) =
[insertAt n x perms | perms <- permutations xs,
n <- [0..length xs] ]
insertAt :: Int -> a -> [a] -> [a]
insertAt 0 y xs = y:xs
insertAt n y (x:xs) = x:(insertAt (n-1) y xs)
was faster than the
Keep in mind that the shootout requires that the first 30 permutations printed
out by the Fannkuch benchmark to be exactly those given in the "example." Any
other order of permutations gets your code labeled "Error" by the shootout
administrators. See the discussion here:
http://alioth.debian
I took a quick crack at optimizing fannkuch.hs. I got it down from 33s to
1.25s on my machine, with N=9. That should put it between forth and
ocaml(bytecode) in the shootout page. The main changes I made were using
Int instead of Int8, foldl' to accumulate the max number of folds, a
custom f
10 matches
Mail list logo
