
I should also point out that I saw performance improvements by manually
factoring out and propagating some common expressions to outer loops in
performance sensitive paths. Now I have made this a habit to do this
manually. Not sure if something like this has also been fixed with that
ticket or some other ticket.
-harendra
On 8 September 2017 at 17:34, Harendra Kumar
Thanks Mikolaj! I have seen some surprising behavior quite a few times recently and I was wondering whether GHC should do better. In one case I had to use SPECIALIZE very aggressively, in another version of the same code it worked well without that. I have been doing a lot of trial and error with the INLINE/NOINLINE pragmas to figure out what the right combination is. Sometimes it just feels like black magic, because I cannot find a rationale to explain the behavior. I am not sure if there are any more such problems lurking in, perhaps this is an area where some improvement looks possible.
-harendra
On 8 September 2017 at 17:10, Mikolaj Konarski
wrote:
Hello,
I've had a similar problem that's been fixed in 8.2.1:
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/12603
You can also use some extreme global flags, such as
ghc-options: -fexpose-all-unfoldings -fspecialise-aggressively
to get most the GHC subtlety and shyness out of the way when experimenting.
Good luck Mikolaj
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Harendra Kumar
wrote: Hi,
I have this code snippet for the bind implementation of a Monad:
AsyncT m >>= f = AsyncT $ \_ stp yld -> let run x = (runAsyncT x) Nothing stp yld yield a _ Nothing = run $ f a yield a _ (Just r) = run $ f a <> (r >>= f) in m Nothing stp yield
I want to have multiple versions of this implementation parameterized by a function, like this:
bindWith k (AsyncT m) f = AsyncT $ \_ stp yld -> let run x = (runAsyncT x) Nothing stp yld yield a _ Nothing = run $ f a yield a _ (Just r) = run $ f a `k` (bindWith k r f) in m Nothing stp yield
And then the bind function becomes:
(>>=) = bindWith (<>)
But this leads to a performance degradation of more than 10%. inlining does not help, I tried INLINE pragma as well as the "inline" GHC builtin. I thought this should be a more or less straightforward replacement making the second version equivalent to the first one. But apparently there is something going on here that makes it perform worse.
I did not look at the core, stg or asm yet. Hoping someone can quickly comment on it. Any ideas why is it so? Can this be worked around somehow?
Thanks, Harendra
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs