Very interesting, that would suggest there is some improvement in build
times.
I want to test out compile times with each of those compilers on our
pathological worst case dependency amazonka (
https://github.com/brendanhay/amazonka)
and a library we've built on top of it mismi (
https://github.com/ambiata/mismi) today. The code in both have a lot of
derivings for data types which seems to be one of the slowest parts.
I'm not that conversant with stack as a tool but were these compile times
with optimisations on / off?
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 4:08 AM, Christopher Allen
I did a build time test with hackage.haskell.org/package/bloodhound today.
I tested 8.2 (RC), 8.0, 7.10, and 7.8. I used Bloodhound in part because it has very few but very large modules which is sort of a pathological case for GHC right now.
I first built the deps and library with each compilers and then reran the build once or twice until the results stabilized. The build re-built the V5/Types module and the examples depending on that module. I triggered a build by adding/removing newline characters in the V5/Types module.
I've pushed the build targets / stack.yamls to the git repository: https://github.com/bitemyapp/bloodhound
Here are the results:
8.2 build: 126.37s user 2.26s system 101% cpu 2:07.16 total
8.0 build: 147.44s user 2.24s system 100% cpu 2:28.93 total
7.10 build: 163.38s user 2.14s system 100% cpu 2:44.64 total
7.8 build: 129.12s user 2.30s system 101% cpu 2:10.09 total
Please let me know if you have any questions.
-- Chris Allen Currently working on http://haskellbook.com _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs