On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 3:44 AM Dominik Pantůček <[email protected]> wrote: > Btw, is it necessary to bump the version on pkgd.racket-lang.org in > order to get it updated? When I `raco install' the package from its > directory, it works fine now. When I use the github repository using > plain `raco pkg install futures-sort' it still uses the old version. > Just removing and re-installing does not change anything.
It re-runs once an hour. You can also ask it to refresh your packages. > > > > > One thing I notice is that it's substantially faster than > > `vector-sort!` even when run in serial mode on traditional Racket (but > > not on Racket CS), so perhaps this should be integrated (or there are > > improvements that we can adopt). > > We mostly discussed that with Jens Axel on #racket - main advantage at > the lowest level is the usage of fixnums for everything. This however > means that the vector's size to be sorted must be `fixnum?'. Which I > think is always the case on all supported architectures (addressable > memory and such). Yes, `vector-length` always produces a fixnum. > Is there a package for these benchmarks? I created some benchmarks based > on sorting vectors of varying size from 1 to 2^27 elements. It would be > really nice to test this on a number of systems to get some empirical > data here. The GC can sometimes surprise (me, at least). My benchmarks > used (current-inexact-milliseconds) before and after each run which is > not something very exact. I'll post some graphs on our company blog on > Thursday probably. My code is here: https://gist.github.com/2c84e31f602b9ad95331a7e29b075294 Sam -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CAK%3DHD%2BZ11TreXm%3DyqO%3DFKtVej0RmKMgdJMNWE7MZURuDrNjE9Q%40mail.gmail.com.
