Re: benchmarking - it's now all(-1,0,1,5,6)% faster

2003-02-10 Thread hv
Dunno where this 'from' line came from, but it says here: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: :On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 10:24:23AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: :all default to a machine dependent default. This default isn't documented :explicitly, but I presume that on x86 it's the same as the x86 specific -m

Re: benchmarking - it's now all(-1,0,1,5,6)% faster

2003-01-11 Thread hv
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: :So I'm confused. It looks like some bits of perl are incredibly sensitive to :cache alignment, or something similar. And as a consequence, perlbench is :reliably reporting wildly varying timings because of this, and because it :only tries a few, very speci

Re: perl5 regexp optimiser (was Re: [perl #15425] Regex bugfix and speed-up)

2002-07-24 Thread hv
"Jeff 'japhy' Pinyan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: :On Jul 24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: :>Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: :>:Is there an easy way any regexp internals guru can suggest to patch perl5's :>:regexp code to disable the optimiser? :> :>At the moment, I suspect not. :> :>This is s

Re: perl5 regexp optimiser (was Re: [perl #15425] Regex bugfix and speed-up)

2002-07-23 Thread hv
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: :Is there an easy way any regexp internals guru can suggest to patch perl5's :regexp code to disable the optimiser? At the moment, I suspect not. This is something I hope we can make easier in the 5.9 track. Hugo