Newest at the top
| 2024-11-14 15:56:08 +0100 | <hellwolf> | (wiki has been fixed) |
| 2024-11-14 15:56:06 +0100 | <bailsman> | I have some parts right now that use random access. But was thinking maybe I don't want to pay a 4x performance penalty just for random access. |
| 2024-11-14 15:55:53 +0100 | <geekosaur> | sadly the first reference that comes to mind is on the wiki… |
| 2024-11-14 15:55:42 +0100 | <ph88> | no |
| 2024-11-14 15:55:38 +0100 | <geekosaur> | ph88, are you aware of tree zippers? |
| 2024-11-14 15:55:14 +0100 | <ph88> | when i have some code more or less in the shape of this thing https://hackage.haskell.org/package/containers-0.7/docs/Data-Tree.html#t:Tree how can i write code that changes `a` with State but there are two points to change it, when going down (into the leafs) and going up (back to the root)? also known as visitor pattern |
| 2024-11-14 15:55:03 +0100 | <geekosaur> | it actually compiles down to a tight loop in most cases, not the C-style linked list you might expect |
| 2024-11-14 15:54:16 +0100 | <geekosaur> | right, map's going to be one of those cases that [] will work very well for |
| 2024-11-14 15:54:11 +0100 | <hellwolf> | "data Array i e" is also under rated. |
| 2024-11-14 15:54:06 +0100 | hgolden | (~hgolden@2603:8000:9d00:3ed1:6c70:1ac0:d127:74dd) hgolden |
| 2024-11-14 15:53:38 +0100 | <bailsman> | Data.Vector.Map over a vector is consistently 4x slower than regular map over []. (Data.Map is 10x slower) |
| 2024-11-14 15:53:14 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> Data.Map is the first one that comes to mind |
| 2024-11-14 15:52:55 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> Have you tried any functional random access data structures? |
| 2024-11-14 15:52:00 +0100 | <bailsman> | I thought I needed to do a lot of random indexing. But, now I'm not sure if I shouldn't instead redesign everything so that it does not require random access. |
| 2024-11-14 15:51:04 +0100 | ph88 | (~ph88@2a02:8109:9e26:c800:7ee4:dffc:4616:9e2a) |
| 2024-11-14 15:50:40 +0100 | misterfish | (~misterfis@31-161-39-137.biz.kpn.net) misterfish |
| 2024-11-14 15:50:37 +0100 | <haskellbridge> | <Bowuigi> Reasoning imperatively in functional languages leads to bad performance in general |
| 2024-11-14 15:50:23 +0100 | <geekosaur> | allocation, gc, and iteration are all optimized because it's so common |
| 2024-11-14 15:49:51 +0100 | <hellwolf> | I mean, if you need to do a log of random indexing, it got to be slow. but for stream processing, it is probably the most efficient |
| 2024-11-14 15:49:41 +0100 | <geekosaur> | if all you're doing is iterating through them, consider that ghc is optimized for that case: think of a list as a loop encoded as data |
| 2024-11-14 15:48:48 +0100 | <bailsman> | Plain old lists are consistently the fastest. I find that somewhat confusing, since in imperative languages linked lists are often slow. |
| 2024-11-14 15:47:02 +0100 | billchenchina | (~billchenc@2a0d:2580:ff0c:1:e3c9:c52b:a429:5bfe) billchenchina |
| 2024-11-14 15:41:12 +0100 | weary-traveler | (~user@user/user363627) (Quit: Konversation terminated!) |
| 2024-11-14 15:39:55 +0100 | Cadey | (~cadey@perl/impostor/xe) (Quit: WeeChat 4.4.2) |
| 2024-11-14 15:36:41 +0100 | yaroot | (~yaroot@2400:4052:ac0:d901:1cf4:2aff:fe51:c04c) yaroot |
| 2024-11-14 15:36:27 +0100 | yaroot | (~yaroot@2400:4052:ac0:d901:1cf4:2aff:fe51:c04c) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2024-11-14 15:35:59 +0100 | alexherbo2 | (~alexherbo@2a02-8440-3313-668b-a9ec-921f-0511-ee3f.rev.sfr.net) alexherbo2 |
| 2024-11-14 15:35:45 +0100 | ash3en | (~Thunderbi@149.222.147.110) (Client Quit) |
| 2024-11-14 15:35:40 +0100 | alexherbo2 | (~alexherbo@2a02-8440-3313-668b-a9ec-921f-0511-ee3f.rev.sfr.net) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-11-14 15:35:09 +0100 | ash3en | (~Thunderbi@149.222.147.110) ash3en |
| 2024-11-14 15:30:28 +0100 | mari-estel | (~mari-este@user/mari-estel) mari-estel |
| 2024-11-14 15:18:37 +0100 | Sgeo | (~Sgeo@user/sgeo) Sgeo |
| 2024-11-14 15:16:32 +0100 | mari-estel | (~mari-este@user/mari-estel) (Quit: errands) |
| 2024-11-14 15:10:02 +0100 | <dminuoso> | bailsman: Do you have the actual code and the generated core to look at? |
| 2024-11-14 15:06:31 +0100 | L29Ah | (~L29Ah@wikipedia/L29Ah) (Ping timeout: 265 seconds) |
| 2024-11-14 15:05:34 +0100 | ash3en | (~Thunderbi@149.222.147.110) (Client Quit) |
| 2024-11-14 15:01:26 +0100 | ash3en | (~Thunderbi@149.222.147.110) ash3en |
| 2024-11-14 14:56:06 +0100 | bitdex | (~bitdex@gateway/tor-sasl/bitdex) (Quit: = "") |
| 2024-11-14 14:50:45 +0100 | weary-traveler | (~user@user/user363627) user363627 |
| 2024-11-14 14:48:24 +0100 | misterfish | (~misterfis@31-161-39-137.biz.kpn.net) (Ping timeout: 276 seconds) |
| 2024-11-14 14:38:28 +0100 | mari-estel | (~mari-este@user/mari-estel) mari-estel |
| 2024-11-14 14:35:46 +0100 | acidjnk | (~acidjnk@p200300d6e7283f73687bc11ede7922f8.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) acidjnk |
| 2024-11-14 14:33:10 +0100 | tromp | (~textual@92-110-219-57.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl) |
| 2024-11-14 14:32:56 +0100 | weary-traveler | (~user@user/user363627) (Remote host closed the connection) |
| 2024-11-14 14:24:13 +0100 | alexherbo2 | (~alexherbo@2a02-8440-3313-668b-a9ec-921f-0511-ee3f.rev.sfr.net) alexherbo2 |
| 2024-11-14 14:18:58 +0100 | <bailsman> | I think if you need a mutable algorithm maybe you should do a CFFI or something. |
| 2024-11-14 14:18:30 +0100 | <geekosaur> | but that's built into GC and I don't think vector can take advantage of it |
| 2024-11-14 14:18:13 +0100 | <bailsman> | I tried look at it with -ddump-simpl and the mutable version doesn't compile to simple code at all. What should be like 5 assembly instructions turns into several pages of assembly. |
| 2024-11-14 14:18:05 +0100 | <geekosaur> | for Array it's split into "cards" and modifications within a single card are batched so only a single copy needs to be done by the mutator, AIUI |
| 2024-11-14 14:17:21 +0100 | <geekosaur> | it's still going to do copies, I think, and more of them the more elements you touch. but I'mnot sure how that plays out for vector |