Re: Guile benchmark

[Arne Babenhauserheide]

Chris Vine <address@hidden> writes:

> On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 21:00:54 +0100
> Andy Wingo <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On Thu 26 Jan 2017 09:39, Rchar <address@hidden> writes:
>> > https://ecraven.github.io/r7rs-benchmarks/benchmark.html
>> > Is Guile slow or fast, comparing to others?  
>> 
>> Schemes that compile to native code go faster.  Guile compiles to
>> bytecode right now, so it's generally (though not always!) slower than
>> the native-compiling schemes.  But compared to the
>> bytecode-interpreter schemes it's pretty fast.
>
> On reading this, out of interest I wrote a very simple program solving
> primes, using the basic 'seive odd divisors to square root' algorithm.
> I tested guile-2.0, guile-2.2, chicken and chez scheme on it.
>
> guile-2.0 was a little slower than chicken with chicken compiled to C,
> but guile-2.2 on that test took about 75% of the time of chicken, and
> about 50% of the time of guile-2.0.  chez scheme was fastest of all,
> taking about 50% of the time of chicken.  OK, chicken may not be the
> fastest of "compile to C" schemes.

Do I read this correctly that Chez took only about 30% less time than
Guile 2.2?

Could you try stalin, too? (Chez wins 28 comparisons, Stalin 14, so that
would be an obvious target)

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein
ohne es zu merken

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature