In fact, unboxed arrays of tuples are represented in vector as tuples of unboxed arrays. On Aug 9, 2012 4:35 AM, "Ketil Malde" wrote:

David Feuer writes:

...

So I was thinking about a mutable array of tuples, but to avoid allocating tuples to modify their fields, I guess I really want an immutable array of tuples of STRefs. Just how much less efficient is this than a plain mutable array? might it even make sense to use parallel mutable arrays? The thought of that is disgusting to me, but at least one of the arrays could likely be made unboxed...

Maybe you could use a tuple of (unboxed) arrays instead? Or if you use Vector instead of Array, I think tuples are member of Unbox (as long as the tuple elements are), and can be used directly in unboxed vectors.

-k -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants

_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe