integer-simple by default
igloo at earth.li
Sun Feb 21 13:14:08 EST 2010
On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 02:56:53PM -0500, Isaac Dupree wrote:
> On 02/20/10 14:37, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>> There's also HIntegerByInt:
>> although it would need to be changed to user lower level types etc.
> that's true, (I wrote it), the current form uses a list-based
> implementation with a lot of recursion and I'd have to see how well that
> converts to some sort of array [at least I assume arrays are the only
> reasonable storage layout...]. I used a couple algorithms to make
> operations faster (at least multiplication -- I don't remember the
> details) so it might be useful code to pick up again. I have a bit of
> time now, if anyone's seriously interested, I could work on haskell
> integer code. As long as I had certain standards
> -what am I trying to accomplish (at least, performance-wise)?
I think opinions are divided on this.
Performance with word-sized Integer's is definitely important.
> -what might be a good low-level format? (And is it important to strew
> unboxed ints all over the place, or is it fine to skip this and count on
> the optimizer?)
I think relying on the optimiser is OK, but don't forget that you don't
have the standard (+) etc.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users