This seems like a good test case for Vincent's tools. They may have been able to tell us that the time was spent contract checking.
Robby On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 5:48 AM, Jens Axel Søgaard <jensa...@soegaard.net> wrote: > I have made a new vector version using zero? instead of exact-zero?. > > To give users a chance to remove the cache after doing partitions > calculations, > I have added set-partitions-cache. > > Code: > > https://github.com/soegaard/racket/blob/patch-14/pkgs/math-pkgs/math-lib/math/private/number-theory/partitions.rkt > > Discussion: > https://github.com/plt/racket/pull/697 > > /Jens Axel > > > 2014-06-29 12:44 GMT+02:00 Jens Axel Søgaard <jensa...@soegaard.net>: >> 2014-06-29 8:47 GMT+02:00 Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu>: >>> It looks like "partitions2.rkt" ends up calling a contract-wrapped >>> variant of `exact-zero?`. >> >> That explains why Eric saw an improvement, when the used #f instead of >> 0 as the not-cached-yet value. >> >> /Jens Axel > > > > -- > -- > Jens Axel Søgaard > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
