Bernie Pope | 1 Nov 05:51 2007
Picon
Picon

Re: Re: Why can't Haskell be faster?


On 01/11/2007, at 2:37 AM, Neil Mitchell wrote:
>
> My guess is that the native code generator in Clean beats GHC, which
> wouldn't be too surprising as GHC is currently rewriting its CPS and
> Register Allocator to produce better native code.

I discussed this with Rinus Plasmeijer (chief designer of Clean) a  
couple of years ago, and if I remember correctly, he said that the  
native code generator in Clean was very good, and a significant  
reason why Clean produces (relatively) fast executables. I think he  
said that they had an assembly programming guru on their team.  
(Apologies to Rinus if I am mis-remembering the conversation).

At the time I was impressed by how fast Clean could recompile itself.

Cheers,
Bernie.
Stefan Holdermans | 1 Nov 11:39 2007
Picon

Re: Re: Why can't Haskell be faster?

Bernie wrote:

> I discussed this with Rinus Plasmeijer (chief designer of Clean) a  
> couple of years ago, and if I remember correctly, he said that the  
> native code generator in Clean was very good, and a significant  
> reason why Clean produces (relatively) fast executables. I think he  
> said that they had an assembly programming guru on their team.  
> (Apologies to Rinus if I am mis-remembering the conversation).

That guru would be John van Groningen...

If I understood correctly, and I think I did, John is now working on  
a Haskell front end for the Clean compiler---which is actually quite  
interesting in the light of the present discussion.

Cheers,

   Stefan

Gmane