Revision as of 18:47, 10 February 2007 edit Gwern (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 48,508 edits →Optimizations: «+"<ref>[http://www.randomhacks.net/articles/2007/02/10/map-fusion-and-haskell-performance 'Map fusion: Making Haskell 225% faster'</ref>"» yay, a reference ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:10, 10 February 2007 edit undo Gwern (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers 48,508 edits →Optimizations: «"this simplification and" → "that is, <math>\left( m f \right) \circ \left( m g \right) = m\left( f \circ g \right) </math>. This", +"eliminates a possibly expensive second map by fusing it with the first map; thus it", "fusio Next edit →
Line 16: ==Optimizations== The mathematical basis of maps allow for a number of [[optimization]]s. If one has <code>map f . map g</code> ('.' is function application; <code>map f (map g xs)</code> is equivalent) then it is the same as the simpler <code>map (f . g) xs</code>; ~~this~~that ~~particular~~is, ~~simplification~~<math>\left( ~~and~~m f \right) \circ \left( m g \right) = m\left( f \circ g \right) </math>. This particular optimization eliminates a possibly expensive second map by fusing it with the first map; thus it is a "map fusion"<ref>[http://www.randomhacks.net/articles/2007/02/10/map-fusion-and-haskell-performance "Map fusion: Making Haskell 225% faster"</ref>. Map functions can and often are defined in terms of a [[Fold (higher-order function)\|fold]] such as <code>foldr</code>, which means one can do a "map-fold fusion": <code>f z . map g</code> is equivalent to <code>foldr (f . g) z</code>. ==Haskell's Functor class==

Map (higher-order function): Difference between revisions