Hello David, Thursday, November 5, 2009, 12:49:38 PM, you wrote:
I think that's in a way what'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.
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'd be happy with Haskell speed ?
i'm happy with haskell speed since i don't expect that it may be used for time-critical parts (btw, i mostly use C libraries written by other people). what i mean is that other people shouldn't expect that Haskell may compete with C based on meaningless shootout numbers or rare successful benchmarks published here (unsuccessful benchmarks are just not published, i hope it's obvious?). the same people that are proving that haskell is as fast as C when they want, will prove that Haskell is much slower when they need opposite conclusion. don't believe ads - check it yourself with code you actually write -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin@gmail.com