[英]Haskell/GHC performance of `any`/`all`
我为Haskell的内置[]
列表数据类型写了量化函数exists
, forall
和none
。 在多个场合,这似乎证明远比更高效的Prelude
/ Data.List
小号any
和all
。 我天真地怀疑这种表现是由于any
和all
使用Θ(n)折叠实现的。 由于我对Haskell相对较新,我认为我必须弄错,或者说这种现象有充分的理由。
来自Data.Foldable
:
-- | Determines whether any element of the structure satisfies the predicate.
any :: Foldable t => (a -> Bool) -> t a -> Bool
any p = getAny #. foldMap (Any #. p)
-- | Determines whether all elements of the structure satisfy the predicate.
all :: Foldable t => (a -> Bool) -> t a -> Bool
all p = getAll #. foldMap (All #. p)
我的实施:
exists :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Bool
exists _ [] = False
exists pred (x : xs) | pred x = True
| otherwise = exists pred xs
和
forall pred = not . exists (not . pred)
none pred = not . exists pred = forall (not . pred)
消除布尔反转:
forall, none :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Bool
forall _ [] = True
forall pred (x : xs) | pred x = forall pred xs
| otherwise = False
none _ [] = True
none pred (x : xs) | pred x = False
| otherwise = none pred xs
all
:
time 327.8 μs (322.4 μs .. 333.0 μs)
0.997 R² (0.996 R² .. 0.998 R²)
mean 328.7 μs (324.1 μs .. 334.2 μs)
std dev 16.95 μs (14.63 μs .. 22.02 μs)
和forall
:
time 113.2 μs (111.2 μs .. 115.0 μs)
0.997 R² (0.996 R² .. 0.998 R²)
mean 112.0 μs (110.0 μs .. 113.9 μs)
std dev 6.333 μs (5.127 μs .. 7.896 μs)
使用标准nf
测量绩效。
正如预期的那样,我没有重新发明,但是低估了编译器标志,并且天真地没有想到-O2
与默认优化级别性能相比会产生如此剧烈的整体差异,也没有预期个别定制写入和库配方之间的优化效率差异。 许多高效的专用标准函数优化只有在明确启用时才会显而易见。
Haskell标记信息的“性能”部分强调了在测试代码效率时优化级别编译器标志的重要性。 通常建议相信库函数实现的复杂性,而不是重新使用RULES
编译指示或重新构造基本形式,以尝试利用已经培养的优化潜力。
我觉得以各种方式重新实现any
方面是有益的:
import Prelude hiding (any)
import Criterion.Main
import Data.Foldable (foldMap)
import Data.Monoid
你的exists
:
exists :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Bool
exists _ [] = False
exists pred (x : xs)
= if pred x
then True
else exists pred xs
使用(||)
版本:
existsOr :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Bool
existsOr _ [] = False
existsOr pred (x : xs) = pred x || existsOr pred xs
使用foldr
:
any :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Bool
any pred = foldr ((||) . pred) False
使用foldr
和Any
:
anyF :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Bool
anyF pred = getAny . foldr (mappend . (Any . pred)) mempty
使用foldMap
和Any
:
anyFM :: (a -> Bool) -> [a] -> Bool
anyFM pred = getAny . foldMap (Any . pred)
与ghc -O0
基准:
benchmarking exists
time 1.552 μs (1.504 μs .. 1.593 μs)
0.989 R² (0.983 R² .. 0.993 R²)
mean 1.482 μs (1.427 μs .. 1.545 μs)
std dev 196.1 ns (168.8 ns .. 229.2 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 93% (severely inflated)
benchmarking existsOr
time 2.699 μs (2.616 μs .. 2.768 μs)
0.992 R² (0.988 R² .. 0.995 R²)
mean 2.629 μs (2.554 μs .. 2.704 μs)
std dev 277.8 ns (235.8 ns .. 351.1 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 89% (severely inflated)
benchmarking any
time 5.551 μs (5.354 μs .. 5.777 μs)
0.990 R² (0.986 R² .. 0.995 R²)
mean 5.553 μs (5.395 μs .. 5.750 μs)
std dev 584.2 ns (447.5 ns .. 835.5 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 88% (severely inflated)
benchmarking anyF
time 7.330 μs (7.081 μs .. 7.612 μs)
0.988 R² (0.982 R² .. 0.994 R²)
mean 7.502 μs (7.272 μs .. 7.762 μs)
std dev 848.2 ns (712.6 ns .. 1.022 μs)
variance introduced by outliers: 89% (severely inflated)
benchmarking anyFM
time 5.668 μs (5.451 μs .. 6.008 μs)
0.987 R² (0.975 R² .. 0.996 R²)
mean 5.807 μs (5.659 μs .. 5.975 μs)
std dev 542.5 ns (446.4 ns .. 721.8 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 86% (severely inflated)
您的版本( exists
)确实是最快的,而且foldr
版本相当慢。
使用ghc -O2
,您的版本( exists
)是最慢的,并且所有其他函数几乎同样快速:
benchmarking exists
time 753.5 ns (725.4 ns .. 779.9 ns)
0.990 R² (0.986 R² .. 0.995 R²)
mean 762.4 ns (737.0 ns .. 787.0 ns)
std dev 82.47 ns (66.79 ns .. 105.1 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 91% (severely inflated)
benchmarking existsOr
time 491.5 ns (478.2 ns .. 503.2 ns)
0.994 R² (0.992 R² .. 0.996 R²)
mean 494.5 ns (481.1 ns .. 512.9 ns)
std dev 54.97 ns (42.54 ns .. 80.34 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 92% (severely inflated)
benchmarking any
time 461.2 ns (442.0 ns .. 479.7 ns)
0.989 R² (0.985 R² .. 0.993 R²)
mean 456.0 ns (439.3 ns .. 476.3 ns)
std dev 60.04 ns (47.27 ns .. 89.47 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 94% (severely inflated)
benchmarking anyF
time 436.9 ns (415.8 ns .. 461.0 ns)
0.978 R² (0.967 R² .. 0.988 R²)
mean 450.8 ns (430.1 ns .. 472.6 ns)
std dev 70.64 ns (57.04 ns .. 85.92 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 96% (severely inflated)
benchmarking anyFM
time 438.9 ns (426.9 ns .. 449.5 ns)
0.993 R² (0.989 R² .. 0.996 R²)
mean 435.8 ns (421.4 ns .. 447.6 ns)
std dev 45.32 ns (36.73 ns .. 58.74 ns)
variance introduced by outliers: 90% (severely inflated)
如果回顾到简易核心代码( ghc -O2 -ddump-simpl
),可以看到,有没有foldr
小号了(与-O0
,一切都还在那里, fold
小号在内)。
因此我冒昧地说你的代码比库代码更快(在非优化版本中, -O0
),因为它更简单(对于不那么通用的潜在价格)。 优化的库代码比您的版本更快,因为它的编写方式是编译器可以识别其优化潜力。 (诚然,这是一个猜测工作)
声明:本站的技术帖子网页,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要转载,请注明本站网址或者原文地址。任何问题请咨询:yoyou2525@163.com.