<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Fernan Bolando <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:fernanbolando@mailc.net">fernanbolando@mailc.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi all<br>
<br>
thanks to everyone that reviewed my code.<br>
<br>
The good news<br>
1. I happy to say that it has become useful enough for me to use it in<br>
some matlab type caluculations. includes transient and dc op<br>
2. The simple pivtoing code I added into the DSP Lu appears to be<br>
useable for this application.<br>
<br>
The bad news<br>
1. If you dont use some strategy in simplifying circuits and use the<br>
simulator only, it would take a considerable amount of time to<br>
converge.<br>
A simple 10x10 non linear matrix will take 13 minutes. In a high-end<br>
circuit simulator this would have taken less than a second.<br>
<br>
What is everybodies expereience in speed difference between C and<br>
interpreted haskell? I am hoping to achieve at least 10x an equivalent<br>
C code.<br>
So if a 10x10 matrix takes 1 second for C I want it to take 10seconds for hugs.</blockquote><div><br>Use GHC's profiler. Figure out why and where the code is slow and then you can do something about it:<br><a href="http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/profiling-and-optimization.html">http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/profiling-and-optimization.html</a><br>
<br>Jason<br></div></div><br>