Hello Thomas, Saturday, February 21, 2009, 1:19:47 AM, you wrote:
I'm not sure what you're getting at Bulat √ it's been demonstrated that ghc is slower than gcc for most cases at the moment (many benchmarks will back this up), *however*, it's also easily verified that ghc has had significantly less effort directed at it than gcc and other imperative compilers, thus, there are many places it can improve greatly.
of course. what fool will say that ghc cannot be optimized the same way as gcc? if we spent the same amount of time for improving ghc back-end as was spent for gcc (tens or hundreds man-years?), then *low-level* Haskell code will become as fast as C one, while remaining several times slower to write
In this case, you've pointed out a really great source of heavy optimisation. Thanks a lot :) Now perhaps it might be an idea to be constructive, rather than trying to stand like nelson going "HA HA" at the people with the inferior compiler.
ghc is superior compiler and it's my main instrument. but it can't make coffee and doesn't contain sophisticated code generator. it's why i dissuade from writing video codes in haskell and i don't like situation when someone too lazy to test speed yourself tell us tales and attack me when i say about real situation -- Best regards, Bulat mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin@gmail.com