Re: On elisp running native - Update 9

[Gong-Yi Liao 廖宮毅]

Andrea,

Question:

What's the difference between Update 1's and   Update 9's benchmark table's byte code column?

The byte code column's  run time results have  decreased roughly 78% from Update 1's 507.23s to Update 9's 114.91, that seems unbelievable if all the Update 9's byte code result are purely based on byte code without any natively compiled code.

Are Update 9's byte code result based on natively compiled built-in function and byte code compiled benchmark functions or they are purely all byte code compiled?

Or there are drastic changes in benchmark environment settings (hardware, number of repetitions) betweens these two updates?

Thanks,

Gong-Yi. 

On Sun, Jun 14, 2020, 8:24 AM Andrea Corallo <akrl@sdf.org> wrote:

Hi all,

I wrote an update about what is going on in the native-comp branch.

In summary is about the recent big improvements on compile time, lambda
performance and portability.

https://akrl.sdf.org/gccemacs.html

I believe in the current state the branch should be much more accessible
to 32bit systems and constrained hardware in general.

I think the next topics coming for me are dynamic scope compilation and
primitive function advising.

Regards

  Andrea

--
akrl@sdf.org