RE: GHC-6.4.1 much slower than GHC-6.4

On 28 October 2005 12:22, Simon Marlow wrote:

> Interesting... there's no obvious culprit, although transF appears to
> be taking a bit more time, and dfs_abort has moved up to 7% time from
> 2%. 
> 
> The program is doing about 6x more allocation, and taking about 4x
> more time, but the extra alloc and time is pretty much spread around
> the program.  I'd say that indicates that the program is really
> *doing more* under 6.4.1, i.e. some major part of the algorithm is
> being re-calculated until 6.4.1, whereas it was being shared under
> 6.4. 

s/until/under/