Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Glen Stampoultzis wrote: >> There was a good thread on this list some weeks ago which mentioned >> another JVM flag: >> -XX:+PrintOptoAssembly >> >> The original thread: >> >> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/314952431ec064b7?fwc=1 >> >

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

> > There was a good thread on this list some weeks ago which mentioned > another JVM flag: > -XX:+PrintOptoAssembly > > The original thread: > > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/314952431ec064b7?fwc=1 > > There's some more information about it at [1]. It looks like you

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 12:00 PM, John Harrop wrote: > Note: the expressions should be run three or four times. The first two or > three timings will be longer than the later ones. (JIT?) Run until the times > are consistent and at least three repetitions have been run in rapid > succession. JIT

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 7:00 AM, John Harrop wrote: > A very straightforward version, and 875.36796ms/1 = 8.7536796ns. > This is on a 2.5GHz machine, so that's only about 22 native instructions per > iteration. The theoretical minimum is over 1/2 of that: > Four fmuls > Three fadds and an

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

John, this will speed up to the same as the others if you let the 0. IIRC from looking at the bytecode before, the 0 is an Integer not an int. user> (time (let [m (int 1) b (double 4.0) x0 (double -0.2) y0 (double 0.1) t (double 2.0) i0 (int 0)] (loop [x (double 0.0) y

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Jul 28, 7:47 pm, Andy Fingerhut wrote: > I have added a script that uses the Java version of the benchmark > programs to generate the large files that were in the distribution > file I gave a link to earlier, so it is much smaller.  I've also > published it on github and added a COPYING file t

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:14 PM, John Harrop wrote: > Your core loop seems to be: > (loop [zr (double 0.0) > zi (double 0.0) > zr2 (double 0.0) > zi2 (double 0.0) > iterations-remaining iterations-remaining] > (if (and (not (neg? iterations-remaining)) >

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Aug 9, 3:37 am, John Harrop wrote: > On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:06 AM, Andy Fingerhut < > > andy_finger...@alum.wustl.edu> wrote: > > I did two runs for each version, with the only difference between them > > being replacing the (zero? i) expression in function 'dot' with a > > different expre

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 3:06 AM, Andy Fingerhut < andy_finger...@alum.wustl.edu> wrote: > I did two runs for each version, with the only difference between them > being replacing the (zero? i) expression in function 'dot' with a > different expression, as indicated below. (zero? i) is a clear winn

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Aug 8, 2:16 pm, John Harrop wrote: > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Mark Engelberg > wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:14 PM, John Harrop wrote: > > >     (if (and (not (= 0 i)) (< (+ zr2 zi2 limit-square))) > > > I believe that (zero? i) is faster than (= 0 i). > > On primitive ints

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Mark Engelberg wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:14 PM, John Harrop wrote: > > (if (and (not (= 0 i)) (< (+ zr2 zi2 limit-square))) > > I believe that (zero? i) is faster than (= 0 i). On primitive ints? Have you tested it? --~--~-~--~~-

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Andy Fingerhut < andy_finger...@alum.wustl.edu> wrote: > > What I suggest is > > > > (loop [zr (double 0.0) > >zi (double 0.0) > >i (int (inc iterations-remaining))] > > (let [zr2 (* zr zr) > > zi2 (* zi zi)] > > (if (and (not (= 0 i))

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 5:14 PM, John Harrop wrote: >     (if (and (not (= 0 i)) (< (+ zr2 zi2 limit-square))) I believe that (zero? i) is faster than (= 0 i). --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure"

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Aug 7, 5:14 pm, John Harrop wrote: > Your core loop seems to be: > (loop [zr (double 0.0) >          zi (double 0.0) >          zr2 (double 0.0) >          zi2 (double 0.0) >          iterations-remaining iterations-remaining] >     (if (and (not (neg? iterations-remaining)) >              (<

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

Your core loop seems to be: (loop [zr (double 0.0) zi (double 0.0) zr2 (double 0.0) zi2 (double 0.0) iterations-remaining iterations-remaining] (if (and (not (neg? iterations-remaining)) (< (+ zr2 zi2) limit-square)) (let [new-zi (double (+

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Aug 6, 6:49 pm, John Harrop wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Andy Fingerhut < > > andy_finger...@alum.wustl.edu> wrote: > > You are correct.  I've updated that file: > > >http://github.com/jafingerhut/clojure-benchmarks/blob/bb9755bdeeccae8... > > Could you post the Mandelbrot code yo

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Andy Fingerhut < andy_finger...@alum.wustl.edu> wrote: > You are correct. I've updated that file: > > > http://github.com/jafingerhut/clojure-benchmarks/blob/bb9755bdeeccae84a9b09fbf34e45f6d45d4b627/RESULTS > Could you post the Mandelbrot code you use? Because I k

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Aug 6, 3:28 pm, André Thieme wrote: > On 27 Jul., 23:26, AndyF wrote: > > Hello Andy, could you please update the following table? > > > > >         |  sbcl  |  perl  |   ghc  |  java |   clj > > - > > mand-   | wrong  | out of |  32.7  |  2

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On 27 Jul., 23:26, AndyF wrote: Hello Andy, could you please update the following table? > >         |  sbcl  |  perl  |   ghc  |  java |   clj > - > mand-   | wrong  | out of |  32.7  |  28.6  | 340.4 > elbrot  | output | mem    |  59.3  |  5

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

I have added a script that uses the Java version of the benchmark programs to generate the large files that were in the distribution file I gave a link to earlier, so it is much smaller. I've also published it on github and added a COPYING file that makes the licenses more explicit (revised BSD f

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Jul 28, 8:26 pm, Berlin Brown wrote: > On Jul 28, 2:37 pm, fft1976 wrote: > > > Thanks, AndyF for writing the code! I'm glad someone's done a > > comparison of idiomatic code instead of making unsubstantiated claims. > > Are you implying that my claims are unsubstantiated or non idiomatic. N

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Jul 28, 2:37 pm, fft1976 wrote: > Thanks, AndyF for writing the code! I'm glad someone's done a > comparison of idiomatic code instead of making unsubstantiated claims. Are you implying that my claims are unsubstantiated or non idiomatic. I took the frequency code from clojure/contrib and i

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

Thanks, AndyF for writing the code! I'm glad someone's done a comparison of idiomatic code instead of making unsubstantiated claims. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this grou

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

Anybody is welcome to take the Clojure sources and do what they will with them -- publish the original or modified code under their own license, sell it, etc. For the Perl, Common Lisp, Haskell, etc. sources, those are published under this license. It isn't my code. http://shootout.alioth.debia

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

Thanks AndyF, do you mind if I use some of your examples and put my own spin on them. I was curious and want to run my own tests and see if I get similar output? On Jul 28, 12:03 am, ataggart wrote: > On Jul 27, 10:06 am, BerlinBrown wrote: > > > So far I have found that clojure is about > >

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Jul 27, 10:06 am, BerlinBrown wrote: > So far I have found that clojure is about > 5-10 times as slow as comparable code in Clojure. I infer you mean clojure execution times are about 5-10 times longer than in java. It depends on what you're doing, but that sounds plausible. Here's are so

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Jul 27, 2:26 pm, AndyF wrote: -snip- > I thought it was interesting that even the Haskell entry to the k- > nucleotide benchmark uses a *mutable* hash table (at least, I think > they are from the discussion on the Wiki page linked below -- my > Haskell knowledge isn't extensive enough to und

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

Berlin: I've got a start at programs for solving two of the problems solved in many other languages on "The Computer Language Benchmarks Game" web site: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org In particular, the k-nucleotide problem has as a significant part of its computation time a similar task to

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Jul 27, 2:15 pm, Aaron Cohen wrote: > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/7ab7c1e62... > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/6cd78dea8... > >

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/7ab7c1e62c468d7c/37678e50ca75be06?q=group:clojure+performance+rich#37678e50ca75be06 http://gr

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

On Jul 27, 1:57 pm, Berlin Brown wrote: > "One thing you need to do is define what you mean exactly when you say > "Java > vs Clojure." " > > Like I said, I didn't want to get too focused on this particular > example. Is there code where I could run in Clojure and where I could > run in Java t

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

"One thing you need to do is define what you mean exactly when you say "Java vs Clojure." " Like I said, I didn't want to get too focused on this particular example. Is there code where I could run in Clojure and where I could run in Java that would end up with the same result. And then I could

Re: Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

One thing you need to do is define what you mean exactly when you say "Java vs Clojure." In your example you are comparing clojure code vs java code but you are also comparing clojure data structures (PersistentMap) with traditional Java data structures (HashMap). I'm not sure you meant to conflat

Clojure performance tests and clojure a little slower than Java

I was coming up with some performance tests for Clojure, going back and forth between different JVM languages (JRuby, Scala) and mainly looking at pure Java code. So far I have found that clojure is about 5-10 times as slow as comparable code in Clojure. Of course this is before any optimization