Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.courno...@gmail.com> skribis: > Andy Wingo <wi...@igalia.com> writes: > >> On Thu 20 Apr 2017 14:35, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> >>> l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) skribis: >>> >>>> ;; 2.724686s real time, 3.117062s run time. 0.880827s spent in GC. >>>> scheme@(guile-user)> (version) >>>> $1 = "2.0.13" >>>> >>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,use(guix scripts build) >>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (guix-build "libreoffice" "certbot" "xmonad" >>> "-n" "--no-substitutes" "--no-build-hook") >>> >>> [...] >>> >>> ;; 1.826528s real time, 1.994426s run time. 0.382750s spent in GC. >>> scheme@(guile-user)> (version) >>> $1 = "2.2.1" >>> >>> That’s a 33% speedup compared to 2.0. >> >> That is a 50% speedup compared to 2.0 :) If we consider its speed as >> being how many times you could do this per second, then 2.0 speed is >> 1/2.72, and 2.2.1 speed is 1/1.82. Speed ratio is then >> 2.72/1.82=1.4945. So 2.2.1 is 1.5x the speed of 2.0, or 50% faster :) >> >> Andy, who is not looking for praise, but who likes perf numbers :) > > Impressive :). Is there a blog post/article/information somewhere about > what went in Guile to make it that faster?
I highly recommend posts from the last couple of years (or more!) at <http://wingolog.org>. :-) <http://wingolog.org/archives/2017/03/15/guile-2-2-omg> has pointers to the most important bits. Ludo’.
