Skip to content

Use level-wise algorithm for BF unfolds #198

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

treeowl
Copy link
Contributor

@treeowl treeowl commented Apr 22, 2016

unfoldTreeM_BF and unfoldForestM_BF previously used a
queue-based algorithm from a note by Okasaki. That same
note indicates that the level-wise approach tends to be slightly
faster, and my own informal tests suggest the same. Both solutions
suffer from a potential space leak, retaining the seed lists
longer than necessary in order to later use their lengths. It
remains to be seen whether this leak can be plugged without
a speed penalty.

@treeowl
Copy link
Contributor Author

treeowl commented Apr 22, 2016

This addresses #124

@treeowl
Copy link
Contributor Author

treeowl commented Apr 22, 2016

@wrengr, I could use a sanity check on this. Also, we really need to come up with QuickCheck properties for this module; currently, we basically have no specification to implement.

@treeowl treeowl force-pushed the level-wise-unfoldM branch 2 times, most recently from b043446 to 674a610 Compare April 22, 2016 01:56
`unfoldTreeM_BF` and `unfoldForestM_BF` previously used a
queue-based algorithm from a note by Okasaki. That same
note indicates that the level-wise approach tends to be slightly
faster, and my own informal tests suggest the same. Both solutions
suffer from a potential space leak, retaining the seed lists
longer than necessary in order to later use their lengths. It
remains to be seen whether this leak can be plugged without
a speed penalty.
@sjakobi
Copy link
Member

sjakobi commented Aug 1, 2020

What's the status here @treeowl?

Also, we really need to come up with QuickCheck properties for this module; currently, we basically have no specification to implement.

Judging by #125, I assume there has been no progress on this?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Consider alternative unfoldTreeM_BF and unfoldForestM_BF implementations
2 participants