2 ms·
> Yep it is a fact. Did you disprove it? No. ... What is your point? Listen and you might hear the point. Initially, simple_hash.h was a basis for comparison
by igouy 17y ago
> Yep it is a fact. Did you disprove it? No. ... What is your point?
Listen and you might hear the point.
Initially, simple_hash.h was a basis for comparison across languages.
Initially, the obvious comparison was between Haskell and Clean, so it was obvious to translate the hash table from the Clean program.
Your speculation about why the Haskell program includes a hash table is wrong.
- codexon 17y agoActually you are wrong. Next time be sure to read the entire article before you make uninformed assumptions. You've obviously missed important information such as this link below and unsurprisingly made a Haskell fanboy comment without verifying the truth to your statements. http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Shootout/Knucleotide#On_mutable_data_structures_in_Haskell http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Shootout/Knucleotide#On_m... >This benchmark is completely bottlenecked by Data.Hashtable (in GHC 6.4.1) and this discussion is based on the assumption that I am using Hashtable optimally...The entry below runs 16 slower than the DMD entry on my powerbook G4. Profiling shows the bottleneck. I downloaded simple_hash.h and shamelessly optimized it to replace Data.Hashtable for exactly this benchmark code.