I used to think, was I clueless !, that if the compiler was good enough, then I&#39;d perform magic for me; like transforming that list-based quicksort in a unboxed, mutable array based one, automatically, if that made sense. Like I said, I was clueless.<br>
<br>Since then, I understood that while modern GHC compilers are awesome, they don&#39;t compete with Gandalf yet. <br><br>I think that&#39;s in a way what&#39;s Bulat is saying : for Haskell to really compete with C in *his view*, if I understand it, the compiler has to be able to take idiomatic Haskell code, and translate it in idomatic C code or better.<br>
<br>Or said another way, we have to be able to write things like SDL, jpeg or mpeg processing in Haskell, instead of writing bindings to C libraries, without losing on performance.<br><br>In short, maybe Bulat wishes to be able to write the time-critical parts of his archiver, in Haskell, without resorting to low-level hacking. Then he&#39;d be happy with Haskell speed ?<br>
<br><br>