I'm writing a paper on using dependent types for optimization, and the most dramatic performance gains would be in programs that frequently add/remove items from sets (implemented as hash tables, linked lists, trees, or whatever). I could write my own benchmark, but that wouldn't be very kosher -- if I write both the algorithm and the benchmark then it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the results will reflect favorably on the algorithm.
The other major class of programs that I could use are the ones that make frequent array accesses, but while there are plenty of benchmarks out there that I could use there are also a whole helluva lot of papers that already cover elimination of array bounds checks. It would be much better if I could get a benchmark that performs set accesses where I can plausibly deny having tweaked the benchmark to give good results.
The other major class of programs that I could use are the ones that make frequent array accesses, but while there are plenty of benchmarks out there that I could use there are also a whole helluva lot of papers that already cover elimination of array bounds checks. It would be much better if I could get a benchmark that performs set accesses where I can plausibly deny having tweaked the benchmark to give good results.