On Wed 25 Apr 2012 16:10, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>> I don't think it's useful to run srfi-1 and vlist tests the same number
>> of times when their complexity varies, as in the assoc case.
>
> Right, and the ‘vhash’ bench is too short to draw any sort of conclusion.
>
> Could you tr
Hi,
Andy Wingo skribis:
> I don't think it's useful to run srfi-1 and vlist tests the same number
> of times when their complexity varies, as in the assoc case.
Right, and the ‘vhash’ bench is too short to draw any sort of conclusion.
Could you try with an appropriate value of ‘--iteration-fac
Hi,
On Wed 25 Apr 2012 01:14, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Would be nice to check with the micro-benchs in vlists.bm as well.
Forgot to mention that.
Before:
;; running guile version 2.0.5.94-a8004d
;; calibrating the benchmarking framework...
;; calibration: ("empty initiali
Hi,
Andy Wingo skribis:
> On Tue 24 Apr 2012 18:31, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> Andy Wingo skribis:
>>
>>> I spent some time poking at vlists and ended up squeezing out a little
>>> bit of performance.
>>
>> Any figures?
>
> Well, last time I checked, with the patch compiling pe
Heya Ludo,
On Tue 24 Apr 2012 18:31, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Andy Wingo skribis:
>
>> I spent some time poking at vlists and ended up squeezing out a little
>> bit of performance.
>
> Any figures?
Well, last time I checked, with the patch compiling peval.scm was 2.10
seconds, c
Hi!
Andy Wingo skribis:
> I went ahead and pushed this branch to stable-2.0. We can roll it out
> again if it causes problems.
Cool, thanks!
> I spent some time poking at vlists and ended up squeezing out a little
> bit of performance.
Any figures?
> I ended up allocating the hash table dat
Hi!
I went ahead and pushed this branch to stable-2.0. We can roll it out
again if it causes problems.
I spent some time poking at vlists and ended up squeezing out a little
bit of performance. I ended up allocating the hash table data inline to
the content vector, after some care looking at wh
Hi!
Andy Wingo skribis:
> This pass does a few related things:
>
> * Replacement of an expression with a reference to a lexical
>identifier.
>
> * Inferring the boolean value of an expression, given previous
>expressions that were true.
>
> * Eliminating an expression where it can cau
On Mon 16 Apr 2012 14:36, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> Initially, I was expecting things like:
>
> (f (* a b) (* a b))
> =>
> (let ((x (* a b)))
> (f x x))
>
> but AIUI the CSE pass here eliminates duplicate references when they are
> superfluous, but not when they are needed
Hi Andy,
Andy Wingo skribis:
> I just finished work on the "wip-cse" branch and would like to merge it
> in sometime. It does a form of common subexpression elimination. It's
> a post-pass, designed to run after peval.
The examples in cse.test suggest that it does a good job. :-)
Initially,
10 matches
Mail list logo
