[plt-scheme] Typed, Contracts, and Normal Scheme Performance Comparison?

From: Matthias Felleisen (matthias at ccs.neu.edu)
Date: Fri Nov 21 08:39:46 EST 2008

On Nov 21, 2008, at 8:29 AM, Robby Findler wrote:

> PLT's contract system encourages cheap contracts, mostly because
> contracts live on module boundaries and tight loops tend not to be
> across module boundaries.
> While I have not done anything close to a careful study, I did
> carefully measure the effect of dropping contracts from drscheme and
> the impact was negligible.

In this day and age, 'negligible' is a questionabe statement :)

One of my students is working on parallelizing contracts. He is  
relying on Kevin's work on 'places'. General statement: it doesn't  
pay off in general, but only when the contract is about as intensive  
as the procedure's computations. That's all we know for now.

-- Matthias

> Robby
> On 11/21/08, Paulo J. Matos <pocmatos at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I would be interested in seeing some comparison between the
>> performance (time / memory) of modules created with Scheme (untyped,
>> no contracts), contracts in module frontiers and typed scheme.
>> Anyone did any experiments or have any useful insights regarding  
>> this?
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> Paulo Jorge Matos - pocmatos at gmail.com
>> Webpage: http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/pocm
>> _________________________________________________
>>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
> _________________________________________________
>   For list-related administrative tasks:
>   http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme

Posted on the users mailing list.