Var indirection is not super cheap, as it has a volatile field, which is a memory fence. I have been working on Clojure with invokedynamic, and I have a demonstrable improvement on microbenchmarks. Obviously your application will have IO and myriad other costs, but I just want to echo that it isn't a trivial cost.
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 2:58:48 PM UTC-4, Mike Thvedt wrote: > > It's worth pointing out that var indirection is already cheap in Java--it > is generally dominated by IO, memory access, object construction, dynamic > dispatch... The JIT compiler will inline any var access if the var doesn't > visibly change, and only needs to check one word of memory per var each > time the JIT compiled function is invoked. I've replaced vars with Java > methods and found a 0% speedup. > > On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 5:54:32 AM UTC-5, Robin Heggelund Hansen > wrote: >> >> Just read this blog post about Oxen ( >> http://arrdem.com/2014/08/05/of_oxen,_carts_and_ordering/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter). >> >> In it is mentioned that Rich is re-introducing invokeStatic to achieve a >> possible 10% performance increase for Clojure 1.7. >> >> I couldn't find any information about this. Anyone know where I can find >> out more? >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
