On 16/07/07, Bulat Ziganshin
Hello Sebastian,
Sunday, July 15, 2007, 9:05:14 PM, you wrote:
As we've demonstrated there's nothing stopping you from writing imperative "C-like" algorithms in Haskell (just like C#), and there certainly wasn't any major performance difference
as Donald mentioned, this test is just limited by cache speed, not by speed of code generated.
But wouldn't you say that in general, if you spend the effort you can write low-level imperative algorithms in Haskell that perform reasonably well? Especially compared to e.g. C#? I think your own libraries demonstrate this! I'm not saying it's as convenient (see the recent thread about "monad splices") to write low-level imperative code in Haskell, but using laziness in C# was hardly a walk on the beach either! So my point is that Haskell isn't geared towards low-level optimizations and performance, but in the few places where you do need it, you *can* get it (IMO for only moderately more inconvenience than you pay for *everything* in a low-level imperative language). Whereas C# is a bit the other way around (easy to modify state, inconvenient to write high-level/lazy/concurrent/etc. code), though something like C is even more the other way around. -- Sebastian Sylvan +44(0)7857-300802 UIN: 44640862