On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 01:23:56PM -0400, Andre Pang wrote:
I've been watching this thread with interest, and posted my own thoughts on this thread and Haskell's performance in general as a blog entry. Rather than repeat it all here, I'll post a link to it:
http://www.algorithm.com.au/mt/haskell/haskells_performance.html
I feel a bit guilty for my ugly wc implementation. At the moment of writing the first version I was thinking only about efficiency, not about elegance. I shouldn't have use unsafeRead, because it doesn't give such a big advantage here if you take the danger into account. Secondly, my solution fails to separate file iteration from the algoritm for the problem. We have already created on this list a version which is fast and quite elegant at the same time, and I feel this one is better for the shootout even if it's slower than the one currently used (but it doesn't use unsafeRead). The good news is that the development GHC 6.3 compiles this to code which is almost as fast as the ugly one. Maybe we should vote: which wc implementation should go to the shootout? Best regards, Tom -- .signature: Too many levels of symbolic links