←back to thread

Concurrency in Haskell: Fast, Simple, Correct

(bitbashing.io)
193 points ingve | 3 comments | 14 Apr 25 10:47 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mikojan ◴[17 Apr 25 03:15 UTC] No.43712753[source]▶
In another life I will be a Haskell programmer
replies(6): >>43712991 #>>43713006 #>>43713074 #>>43714014 #>>43714156 #>>43716535 #
revskill ◴[17 Apr 25 04:02 UTC] No.43713006[source]▶
Why not python ?
replies(3): >>43713045 #>>43713108 #>>43714465 #
tasuki ◴[17 Apr 25 08:59 UTC] No.43714465[source]▶
No one wants to be a python programmer. It's a practical language to get things done. It isn't a language to make you feel proud of yourself nor about the current state of our industry.
replies(3): >>43715762 #>>43716452 #>>43724201 #
sgarland ◴[17 Apr 25 13:23 UTC] No.43716452[source]▶
I’ve enjoyed making it go faster by finding quirks, but at this point it’s mostly become “OK, what else can I offload to C?”

I should really learn Rust. Or Zig. I tried Nim (best of both worlds, Python-esque code that compiles to C!), but it wasn’t nearly as fast as my Python + C for my specific use case.

replies(1): >>43719330 #
1. knighthack ◴[17 Apr 25 16:46 UTC] No.43719330[source]▶
What exactly do you write, where your Python+C is faster than Nim which compiles to optimized C?
replies(1): >>43719502 #
2. sgarland ◴[17 Apr 25 17:00 UTC] No.43719502[source]▶
Generating millions of rows of synthetic data for testing RDBMS.

Tbf, I didn't spend much time trying to optimize the Nim code once I got a working PoC, so it's entirely possible that I could've made it faster.

replies(1): >>43721105 #
3. cb321 ◴[17 Apr 25 19:28 UTC] No.43721105[source]▶
You may no longer be interested in this kind of thing, but if you are there might be some ideas of note over at https://github.com/c-blake/nio/blob/main/db-bench.md (in particular the demo/gbyGen.nim program).