I added some type annotations & tried it. The result is 16s, substantially slower.
Haven't tried tjson, yet. I'm not actually even that interested in json, it was just something at-hand to try. >From this thread, it sounds like there's some knowledge about racket performance that isn't yet in the docs. Are there any other resources on performance? On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 10:36:23 AM UTC-8, johnbclements wrote: > > > It would be interesting to see how much faster (if at all) it is to run > the TR version of this code. > > John > > > > On Feb 22, 2019, at 9:47 AM, Brian Craft <craft...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > I'm doing a few performance tests, just to get an idea of racket > performance. The following result surprised me a bit. Parsing 1M strings > from a json array, like > > > > (define samples (time (read-json (open-input-file "test.json")))) > > > > running with 'racket test.rkt' > > > > Comparing to js, java, and clojure: > > > > js 0.128s > > java 0.130s > > clojure 1.3s > > racket 10s > > > > This is pretty slow. Is this typical? Are there other steps I should be > taking, for performance? > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Racket Users" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > an email to racket-users...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
