I've put my benchmarking code online at:
http://inmachina.net/~jwlato/haskell/research-iteratee.tar.bz2
unpack it so you have this directory structure:
./iteratee
./research-iteratee/
Also download my criterionProcessor programs. The darcs repo is at
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010 12:51:59 -0800, John Millikin jmilli...@gmail.com wrote:
Both have advantages and disadvantages. The primary advantage of lazy
IO over iteratees is that it's much, *much* easier to understand --
existing experience with monads can be used immediately. The downsides
of lazy
).
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 06:04, John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] safe lazy IO or Iteratee?
Downside: iteratees are very hard to understand. I wrote a
decently-sized article about them trying to figure out how to make
them useful, and some comments in one of Oleg's
John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
Both designs appear to offer similar performance in aggregate,
although there are differences for particular functions. I haven't
yet had a chance to test the performance of the CPS variant, although
Oleg has indicated he expects it will be higher.
On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Valery V. Vorotyntsev
valery...@gmail.com wrote:
John Lato jwl...@gmail.com wrote:
Both designs appear to offer similar performance in aggregate,
although there are differences for particular functions. I haven't
yet had a chance to test the performance of the
Benchmark attached. It just enumerates a list until EOF is reached.
An interesting thing I've noticed is that IterateeMCPS performs better
with no optimization, but -O2 gives IterateeM the advantage. Their
relative performance depends heavily on the chunk size -- for example,
CPS is much faster
Hi everyone,
This is not an attempt to start a flame war. I'm just trying to get a good
feel for the advantages and disadvantages of the newer safe lazy io lib
available on Hackage vs using Iteratee.
It does appear to me that using something like Itereatee gives a bit of room
to really tweak
Both have advantages and disadvantages. The primary advantage of lazy
IO over iteratees is that it's much, *much* easier to understand --
existing experience with monads can be used immediately. The downsides
of lazy IO, of course, are well documented[1][2][3].
Some are fixed by the safe/strict
Thanks for the detailed response below...
I must be able to understand how the resources will be used in my system for
mission-critical, long-running applications.
Dave
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 12:51 PM, John Millikin jmilli...@gmail.com wrote:
Both have advantages and disadvantages. The
Hello John,
Thursday, February 4, 2010, 11:51:59 PM, you wrote:
tl;dr: Lots of smart people, with a history of being right about this
sort of thing, say iteratees are better. Evidence suggests
iteratee-based IO is faster and more predictable than lazy IO.
Iteratees are really hard to
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Bulat Ziganshin
bulat.zigans...@gmail.comwrote:
Hello John,
Thursday, February 4, 2010, 11:51:59 PM, you wrote:
tl;dr: Lots of smart people, with a history of being right about this
sort of thing, say iteratees are better. Evidence suggests
iteratee-based
Hello,
From: David Leimbach leim...@gmail.com
Hi everyone,
Yet at the same time, I'm quite enamored with the beauty of interact and
functions of that sort. I realize mixing the effects of the lazy IO and
pure code may not be the clearest way to write code for everyone, but there
is
12 matches
Mail list logo
