+++ Howard B. Golden [Dec 05 09 13:36 ]:

On Friday December 4, 2009, John MacFarlane wrote:

...

I used criterion to compare pandoc compiled with parsec2 to pandoc compiled with your version of parsec3. (The benchmark is converting testsuite.txt from markdown to HTML.) The difference was minor:

parsec2: mean: 67.66576 ms, lb 67.56722 ms, ub 67.88983 ms, ci 0.950 std dev: 722.3878 us, lb 323.0343 us, ub 1.356013 ms, ci 0.950

parsec3: mean: 68.20847 ms, lb 68.16387 ms, ub 68.26284 ms, ci 0.950 std dev: 252.7773 us, lb 204.5512 us, ub 325.2424 us, ci 0.950

So, once you release the new parsec3, I am prepared to remove the "parsec < 3" restriction from the libraries I maintain: pandoc, highlighting-kate, filestore, gitit, and yst.

I don't know what the performance of the current parsec3 is compared to parsec2. It would be helpful if you could run your benchmark for that also and include it.

parsec 2.1.0.1 from HackageDB: mean: 67.71456 ms, lb 67.65181 ms, ub 67.82660 ms, ci 0.950 std dev: 416.1303 us, lb 274.0063 us, ub 761.6995 us, ci 0.950 parsec 3.0.1 from HackageDB: mean: 188.5380 ms, lb 188.3217 ms, ub 188.7615 ms, ci 0.950 std dev: 1.136199 ms, lb 964.3489 us, ub 1.366720 ms, ci 0.950 parsec 3.0.1 from Antoine: mean: 69.29665 ms, lb 69.22450 ms, ub 69.48016 ms, ci 0.950 std dev: 551.3562 us, lb 263.7954 us, ub 1.156183 ms, ci 0.950

If the only issue is performance, I respectfully request that you remove the parsec < 3 requirement even before the new version of parsec3 is released. Thank you.

Sorry, I don't want to do that. Lots of people have both parsec-2 and parsec-3 installed, and if I remove the restriction, their pandoc (and gitit and...) will be much slower unless they take special steps. John