On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Paulo Tanimoto <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ptanimoto@gmail.com">ptanimoto@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 6:16 AM, John Lato <<a href="mailto:jwlato@gmail.com">jwlato@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> It's not necessary to understand CPS to use CPS-based iteratees. The CPS<br>
> implementation generally simplifies the types and removes the necessity for<br>
> special combinators like ($$) and (>>==), so I strongly suspect newcomers<br>
> will find it easier to use than other variants (although unfortunately I can<br>
> no longer say this from personal experience). It incorporates the best<br>
> features of Oleg's two implementations in IterateeM.hs. The only drawback<br>
> is the added thought overhead of CPS, but users need not be aware of this<br>
> for the most part.<br>
<br>
</div>I agree with you, John. Personally, I find the CPS version easier to<br>
use, that's why I asked. But since people have different styles, I<br>
guess it's not a bad thing that the two packages use a different<br>
implementation.<br>
<br>
When I was reimplementing Iteratees I also didn't find any noticeable<br>
slowdown with CPS, but my benchmarks were very simple -- unlike yours.<br>
You are comparing the darcs branch to the version on Hackage, right?<font color="#888888"><br></font></blockquote><div><br>I'm actually referring to benchmarks from about 10-8 months ago. I did have them on the website, but it looks like I took them down. I haven't run any comparisons recently, except for a few to determine where INLINEs are beneficial. I'll make a current set and post them when they're ready.<br>
<br>John<br></div></div><br>