On 27 December 2011 20:41, Boris Lykah
Hello everyone,
I noticed that Prelude break and span Core uses boxed tuples which is quite expensive. Since functions from Prelude are used everywhere, many programs will benefit from their optimization. Please see my implementation which uses internal worker function and unboxed tuples. In the best case it could perform more than twice faster than Prelude functions.
import Criterion.Main
newspan :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> ([a], [a]) newspan p xs = go xs where go xs@[] = (xs, xs) go xs@(x:xs') | p x = case go xs' of (ys, zs) -> (x:ys,zs) | otherwise = ([], xs)
newbreak :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> ([a], [a]) newbreak p xs = go xs where go xs@[] = (xs, xs) go xs@(x:xs') | p x = ([], xs) | otherwise = case go xs' of (ys, zs) -> (x:ys,zs)
versus f1 f2 pred arg = [ bench "new" $ whnf (f1 pred) arg , bench "prelude" $ whnf (f2 pred) arg ]
variousLists f1 f2 pred = [ bgroup "fullMatch" $ versus f1 f2 pred (replicate 1000 1 :: [Int]) , bgroup "failOnFirst" $ versus f1 f2 (not . pred) (replicate 1000 1 :: [Int]) , bgroup "emptyList" $ versus f1 f2 pred ([]::[Int]) ]
main = defaultMain [ bgroup "span" $ variousLists newspan span (==1) , bgroup "break" $ variousLists newbreak break (/=1) ]
-- Regards, Boris
_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
Note that your benchmarks just compare the time to construct the final tuples and not the lists inside of it. This is because you're using 'whnf' instead of 'nf'. Because your new functions are strict in the tail of the argument list (in contrast to the current span and break), it will actually take a longer time to calculate the final tuple: http://basvandijk.github.com/newSpanBreak_WHNF.html So I think it's fairer to use 'nf': http://basvandijk.github.com/newSpanBreak_NF.html But, as already mentioned, your functions are more strict than the current functions:
head $ fst $ span (==1) (1:undefined) 1 head $ fst $ newspan (==1) (1:undefined) *** Exception: Prelude.undefined
head $ fst $ break (/=1) (1:undefined) 1 head $ fst $ newbreak (/=1) (1:undefined) *** Exception: Prelude.undefined
So they can't just replace the originals without going through the library submission process. But lets see what happens when we make them as lazy as the original functions: newspan :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> ([a], [a]) newspan p xs = go xs where go xs@[] = (xs, xs) go xs@(x:xs') | p x = let (ys, zs) = go xs' in (x:ys,zs) | otherwise = ([], xs) newbreak :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> ([a], [a]) newbreak p xs = go xs where go xs@[] = (xs, xs) go xs@(x:xs') | p x = ([], xs) | otherwise = let (ys, zs) = go xs' in (x:ys,zs) They are faster but not much: http://basvandijk.github.com/newSpanBreak_Lazy_NF.html However I do expect them to be significantly faster when they are applied fully saturated. Cheers, Bas