nofib

[Andrew Cheadle]

I agree with Simon, around 20 seconds would be great. I don't particulalry
want to return to the days when a ghc compile and a nofib run took all night
just to tell me I'd screwed the runtime somewehere ;-)

Cheers

Andy

On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Simon Marlow wrote:

>> | The current plain is just to try to make all the tests take
>> | around 10 seconds
>> | to run on my workstation.
>>
>> What spec is your workstation?
>>
>> | If people have any other requested changes to nofib, please
>> | shout now, so they
>> | can work their way into the same mod.
>> |
>> |
>> | Likewise, if people have reasons why they think 10 seconds is
>> | an inappropriate
>> | time to run for, please shout. Some of the current tests run
>> | so quickly that,
>> | at least on my machine, one can't accurately time them.
>>
>> I think you should shoot for more like 60 seconds.  A test that
>> runs for 10 seconds today will be back in the nearly-useless
>> category (~1 second) within 2-3 years, at current progress rates
>> for hardware.
>
>I think 60 seconds would be a bit on the long side - when running tests
>interactively rather than in the background having tests that run that
>long would be too painful.  10 or maybe 20 seconds would be better IMO.
>
>Cheers,
>	Simon
>
>_______________________________________________
>Cvs-ghc mailing list
>Cvs-ghc@haskell.org
>http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
>

*********************************************************************
*  Andrew Cheadle                    email:  a.cheadle@doc.ic.ac.uk *
*  Department of Computing           http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~amc4/ *
*  Imperial College                                                 *
*  University of London                                             *
*********************************************************************