Ludovic Courtès schreef:
I recently merged in changes from HEAD in my BGC branch. If you want to
give it a try and if you want to help, you can fetch it this way:
$ tla register-archive http://www.laas.fr/~lcourtes/software/arch-2005/
$ tla get [EMAIL PROTECTED]/guile-core--boehm-gc--1.9
Ludovic Courtès schreef:
$ tla register-archive http://www.laas.fr/~lcourtes/software/arch-2005/
$ tla get [EMAIL PROTECTED]/guile-core--boehm-gc--1.9
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.. -I.. -I.. -g -O2 -Wall
-Wmissing-prototypes -Werror -MT libguile_la-gc.lo -MD -MP -MF
.deps/libguile_la-
Ludovic Courtès schreef:
But please, relax about performance, we still haven't run any meaningful
benchmark. ;-)
btw, is there any news on this patch? I'm quite keen on dumping
LilyPond's Rational class in favor of Scheme rationals, but adding gc
mark functions for that is just too much work;
Ludovic Courtès schreef:
But please, relax about performance, we still haven't run any meaningful
benchmark. ;-)
btw, is there any news on this patch? I'm quite keen on dumping
LilyPond's Rational class in favor of Scheme rationals, but adding gc
mark functions for that is just too much work;
Ludovic Courtès schreef:
Hi Han-Wen,
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ludovic Courtès schreef:
But please, relax about performance, we still haven't run any meaningful
benchmark. ;-)
btw, is there any news on this patch? I'm quite keen on dumping
LilyPond's Rational class in fa
Ludovic Courtès schreef:
Well, no real news. My "not-so-meaningful benchmarks" (running a
loop[*]) reproductively show that "GBGC" is noticeably slower than "real
Guile" (1.5 to 2 times slower).
the following options turn on generational GC
GC_enable_incremental ();
GC_time_limit = GC_TIM
Ludovic Courtès schreef:
Well, no real news. My "not-so-meaningful benchmarks" (running a
loop[*]) reproductively show that "GBGC" is noticeably slower than "real
Guile" (1.5 to 2 times slower).
with some final tweaks I got it to 26% (large test) and 32% (small test)
slower.
--
Han-Wen Nie
