Ketil Malde
Is it an idea to go back a few steps to more idiomatic code?
I had a whirl at the 'reverse complement' benchmark, where we're in the Java ballpark for performance and memory, but at twice the code size. My simple implmentation is down from seventy to about forty lines, perhaps thirty-five if I remove comments etc. The bad news is that it's about twice as slow, my benchmark takes about 0.45s vs 0.25 for the shootout entry. One interesting observation is that 'map' from Data.ByteString working directly on Word8 is actually *slower* than 'map' from Data.ByteString.Char8. Anyway - it occurs to me that this can fairly simply be sped up by parallelizing: chunk the input, complement chunks in parallel, and reverse. Any takers? -k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants