Re: [go-nuts] Re: What explains this 6x slowdown ?

On Thursday, March 25, 2021 at 4:45:31 PM UTC-7 Kurtis Rader wrote: > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 4:21 PM 'Isaac Gouy' via golang-nuts wrote: > >> compile-time-constant program >> int3m3.225s >> int322m43.404s >> int643m3.240s >>

[go-nuts] Re: What explains this 6x slowdown ?

On Thursday, March 25, 2021 at 12:31:25 PM UTC-7 Didier wrote: > I believe this is simply due to the 64 bits integer division. > > 1. Contrary to Java or most C implementations int is 64 bits with Go on > AMD64, and not 32 bits. Integer division on 64 bits is more expensive than > for 32 bits.

[go-nuts] Re: What explains this 6x slowdown ?

> I believe this is simply due to the 64 bits integer division. > > 1. Contrary to Java or most C implementations int is 64 bits with Go on > AMD64, and not 32 bits. Integer division on 64 bits is more expensive than > for 32 bits. > 2. When array_length is known at compile time, the compiler c

[go-nuts] What explains this 6x slowdown ?

( Yeah, it's a tiny tiny program from someone's language comparison but this is a hugely bigger slowdown than gcc or java? The code change is compile time const

[go-nuts] Re: Testing changes to Go SSA?

> Or is there a general testsuite that language developers use to test > compiler changes? I see this: > https://github.com/Byron/benchmarksgame-cvs-mirror but I am not sure if > this is the right place to look at. > That github site seems very out-of-date. https://salsa.debian.org/b

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

On Tuesday, March 12, 2019, 12:54:47 PM PDT, Robert Engels wrote: I swear you are just trolling now or looking at the wrong things. Review > https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/program/binarytrees-gpp-2.html > > and > https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchma

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

On Monday, March 11, 2019, 3:54:56 PM PDT, Robert Engels wrote: > Yes, so use Java - for this synthetic benchmark. I’m not sure what the point is you are trying to make. > Both Java and Go outperform the C and C++ solutions using off the shelf memory management in the binary tree tests. In wh

Re: [go-nuts] Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 7:22:41 PM UTC-8, Michael Jones wrote: > > …make the compiler's rewrite rules and register assignments be able to > express that two 32-bit variables are "roommates" in a 64-bit register. > Kind-of like Automatic Vectorization

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 5:44:21 AM UTC-8, Robert Engels wrote: > > As I pointed out long ago on stackoverflow the benchmark games are > seriously flawed and should not be used for language performance > comparisons. > > As a simple example, look at binary trees. In all of the “fast” > im

Re: [go-nuts] sync.Pool misuse binary-trees

Is there a more concise way to write var check = 1 + self.left.itemCheck() + self.right.itemCheck() pool.Put(self.left) self.left = nil pool.Put(self.right) self.right = nil return check -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Goog

Re: [go-nuts] Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 7:22:41 PM UTC-8, Michael Jones wrote: > > There is another problem about these microbenchmarks as well--they often > are ports of an originating C-version. > Which microbenchmarks? You quoted a reply to a question about "Performance comparison of Go, C++, and J

Re: [go-nuts] Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 4:03:52 PM UTC-8, Bakul Shah wrote: > > Thanks for an interesting read! > > Curious to know if you guys have any estimates on the number of lines, > development time and number of bugs for each language implementation? I > realize this is subjective but this compari

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 5:44:21 AM UTC-8, Robert Engels wrote: > > As I pointed out long ago on stackoverflow the benchmark games are > seriously flawed and should not be used for language performance > comparisons. > > As a simple example, look at binary trees. In all of the “fast” > im

[go-nuts] sync.Pool misuse binary-trees

Is this a misuse of sync.Pool? How would a Go programmer re-write the ugly `t.left =` `self.left =` ? package main import ( "fmt" "sync" ) type Node struct { left, right *Node } var pool = sync.Pool { New: func() interface{} { re

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

On Wednesday, March 6, 2019 at 12:41:21 PM UTC-8, Bradlee Johnson wrote: > > As the saying goes, "there are lies, damned lies and benchmarks." > After all, facts are facts, and although we may quote one to another with a chuckle the words of the Wise Statesman, 'Lies--damned lies--and statistic

[go-nuts] Performance comparison of Go, C++, and Java for biological sequencing tool

"We reimplemented elPrep in all three languages and benchmarked their runtime performance and memory use. Results: *The Go implementation performs best*, yielding the best balance between runtime performance and memory use. While the Java benchmarks report a somewhat faster runtime than the Go

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Go vs C speed - What am I doing wrong?

> On Monday, February 11, 2019, 10:59:20 AM PST, Robert Engels wrote: > > Please don’t base any decisions on the benchmark games. They are seriously > flawed. > Someone could write "They are seriously flawed." without ever having looked to see :-) -- You received this message because yo

Re: [go-nuts] Go vs C speed - What am I doing wrong?

On Saturday, February 9, 2019 at 9:30:25 AM UTC-8, Isaac Gouy wrote: > On Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 3:03:42 AM UTC-8, ohir wrote: > >> >> > Contributors can recreate the same benchmarking routines in C, golang, >> JS >> >> This is how "benchmark game" **entertaining** sites are architectured.

Re: [go-nuts] Go vs C speed - What am I doing wrong?

On Saturday, February 9, 2019 at 9:20:41 AM UTC-8, Isaac Gouy wrote: > > > On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 10:44:11 AM UTC-8, Milind Thombre wrote: >> >> … a quantitative performance study/Benchmarking study … If a verifiable >> (unbiased) study is already done and published, I'd greatly apprecia

Re: [go-nuts] Go vs C speed - What am I doing wrong?

On Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 3:03:42 AM UTC-8, ohir wrote: > > > Contributors can recreate the same benchmarking routines in C, golang, > JS > > This is how "benchmark game" **entertaining** sites are architectured. > Their > "comparisons" are moot for the industry. Look at the history of

Re: [go-nuts] Go vs C speed - What am I doing wrong?

On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 10:44:11 AM UTC-8, Milind Thombre wrote: > > … a quantitative performance study/Benchmarking study … If a verifiable > (unbiased) study is already done and published, I'd greatly appreciate it > if someone can post the link. > What do you not find acceptable abou

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 6:25:38 PM UTC-7, kortschak wrote: > > Can you explain the rationale behind the classification of libraries as > libraries or not libraries? It seems pretty arbitrary. > > (I'm interested from a sociological perspective, but not enough to > bother to go to the b

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 7:44:28 PM UTC-7, Jason E. Aten wrote: > > Observe that the java benchmark continues to be allowed to use an > accelerated hash table library. > "accelerated" ? By all means, post your reasons for *why that Java library should not be used* in the benchmarks

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 6:47:59 PM UTC-7, Clark Wierda wrote: > Apparently, you can only use approved libraries that produce the ranking > he wants. > Which one of us is the language advocate? :-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gola

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 8:15:09 AM UTC-7, sascha.l@googlemail.com wrote: > > If this does not count the Benchmark game follows a skewed defintion of a > library. > I'm sorry that you don't seem to understand what is expected. > Can you eleborate please, what a library is?

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 2:12:21 AM UTC-7, sascha.l@googlemail.com wrote: > > Maybe. For the shootout I prefer the embedded variant to > to demonstrate it is do-able without resorting to 3rd party libs. > Unfortunately, k-nucleotide now explicitly requires use of a built-in / li

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 4:47:35 PM UTC-7, Tim Hawkins wrote: > > I would have expected that aside from informing about general performance, > one of the purposes for benchmarks would have been to create pressure for > improvement of key features of the laguage, this seems to circumvent

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 6:31:05 AM UTC-7, Peter Herth wrote: > > And, as this very benchmarking site is far too often abused to talk down > on languages, just because they have some bad test results, we as the Go > community should try to get the fastest results there - most other progra

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 3:53:12 PM UTC-7, Harald Weidner wrote: > > > The regex-dna benchmark is even more strange. Neither the measured Go nor > the > Java implementation use the standard regexp libs. The Go program imports > bindings to PCRE, the Java program uses TclRE. > There'

Re: [go-nuts] Go performance in regexdna

On Thursday, September 1, 2016 at 2:45:42 PM UTC-7, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 1:34 PM, DrGo > > wrote: > > What is the reason for Go particularly poor performance in regexdna as > shown here? > > > https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/performance.php?test=re

Re: [go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

> I looked at that this morning and sped it up a little. > *fyi "Contribute your programs" * -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving

[go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 10:09:39 AM UTC-7, Scott Pakin wrote: > > > Go 1.7 is faster than C on the mandelbrot test and faster than C++ also > on reverse-complement? How did *that* happen? > mandelbrot -- look at the program source code.

[go-nuts] Re: In case you missed it: language benchmarks for Go 1.7, and language adoption

On Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 1:01:51 AM UTC-7, Torsten Bronger wrote: > Obviously, C is on a steep decline in the OSS world, while Go (you > may switch off the C line to see it better) is gaining ground > steadily, and doing so faster than Rust. > Well, obviously, we find JavaScript on th