... | ... | @@ -79,15 +79,15 @@ TODO Lots of fusion changes have happened in the last few months too - but these |
|
|
- `map` strikes again? 2601324 vs 3597333 calls, with an accompanying allocation delta.
|
|
|
- But some other inner loops here work and go away correctly (mainly `go`), unlike e.g. `lcss`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Comparing integer-gmp 0.5 and 2.0
|
|
|
#### Comparing integer-gmp 0.5 and 1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the major factors that has changed recently is `integer-gmp`. Namely, GHC 7.10 includes `integer-gmp-2.0`, a major rework of `integer-gmp-0.5`. I've compiled GHC 7.10.1 with `integer-gmp` 0.5 and 2.0. \[Here [ https://gist.github.com/bgamari/5de75ac998a346b70ce8](https://gist.github.com/bgamari/5de75ac998a346b70ce8)\] is a nofib comparison. There are a few interesting points here,
|
|
|
One of the major factors that has changed recently is `integer-gmp`. Namely, GHC 7.10 includes `integer-gmp-1.0`, a major rework of `integer-gmp-0.5`. I've compiled GHC 7.10.1 with `integer-gmp` 0.5 and 1.0. \[Here [ https://gist.github.com/bgamari/5de75ac998a346b70ce8](https://gist.github.com/bgamari/5de75ac998a346b70ce8)\] is a nofib comparison. There are a few interesting points here,
|
|
|
|
|
|
- Binary sizes dropped dramatically and consistently (typically around 60 to 70%) from 0.5 to 2.0.
|
|
|
- Binary sizes dropped dramatically and consistently (typically around 60 to 70%) from 0.5 to 1.0.
|
|
|
- Runtime is almost always within error. A few exceptions,
|
|
|
|
|
|
- `binary-trees`: 6% slower with 2.0
|
|
|
- `binary-trees`: 6% slower with 1.0
|
|
|
- `pidigits`: 5% slower
|
|
|
- `integer`: 4% slower
|
|
|
- `cryptarithm1`: 2.5% slower
|
... | ... | |