On 2006-09-05, Udo Stenzel <
u.stenzel@...> wrote:
> The culprit is insertWith, it inserts unevaluated thunks into your map
This turned out to be the answer -- thanks!
I posted a new version of the code here:
http://changelog.complete.org/posts/536-Another-Haskell-Solution-to-Lars-Problem.htmlThis particular test set was a few hundred copies of the GPL. So the
Map was fairly small, since each word occured many, many times -- but
there weren't a whole lot of words. So the problem was not the
inefficiency of Data.Map, nor the inefficiency of Strings (though that
inefficiency does explain why the Python solution is faster, I'm sure).
-- John
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@...
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe