David Himmelstrup has been working on nobench as well, for LHC,
http://darcs.haskell.org/~lemmih/nobench/x86_64/results.html
dmp:
> Thanks for the input. I'll take a look at the nobench suite. I might be
> interested in working to improve nobench. Is there some obvious
> improvements that
On 09/10/2009 17:34, Ian Lynagh wrote:
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 11:25:43AM -0500, David Peixotto wrote:
Simon M, can you say what your reliance on nobench-analyse is (output
format, specific collected stats, etc.)?
If you're planning on working on -analyse, it would make sense to switch
to usi
On 09/10/2009 17:25, David Peixotto wrote:
Thanks for the input. I'll take a look at the nobench suite. I might be
interested in working to improve nobench. Is there some obvious
improvements that people have in mind (besides using Criterion), or it
just generally needs some updated benchmarks? I
On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 11:25:43AM -0500, David Peixotto wrote:
>
> Simon M, can you say what your reliance on nobench-analyse is (output
> format, specific collected stats, etc.)?
If you're planning on working on -analyse, it would make sense to switch
to using the "+RTS -t --machine-readable"
Thanks for the input. I'll take a look at the nobench suite. I might
be interested in working to improve nobench. Is there some obvious
improvements that people have in mind (besides using Criterion), or it
just generally needs some updated benchmarks? I suppose one question
to consider is
On 09/10/2009 09:43, Malcolm Wallace wrote:
Would you say that the nofib benchmarks are the best available for
measuring the effectiveness of compiler optimizations, or is there a
better benchmarking suite for that purpose?
I don't know about "better", but the nobench suite (which is largely
ba
Would you say that the nofib benchmarks are the best available for
measuring the effectiveness of compiler optimizations, or is there a
better benchmarking suite for that purpose?
I don't know about "better", but the nobench suite (which is largely
based on nofib, but goes further) automate
[mailto:cvs-ghc-boun...@haskell.org] On
Behalf Of David Peixotto
Sent: 09 October 2009 05:01
To: cvs-ghc@haskell.org
Subject: nofib benchmarks for measuring the effects of compiler optimizations
Hi,
I'm interested in looking at the effects on performance of various compiler
optimization
Hi,
I'm interested in looking at the effects on performance of various
compiler optimizations in GHC. I ran the nofib benchmarks against the
stable branch to get a feel for some very simple results. In my
measurements I only saw a maximum of 2.8% difference in runtime when
using -O0 and -
