[racket] Efficiency of tight loops in Racket

From: Robby Findler (robby at eecs.northwestern.edu)
Date: Mon Jan 17 14:21:35 EST 2011

Oh, yes. DrRacket does not try to use two processors for anything
(unless your program uses futures or places, of course).

Robby

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Jos Koot <jos.koot at telefonica.net> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply.
> What I am observing is that when running DrScheme without any other apps
> running, only one processor is used at a time, although control often
> swichtes bnetween the two processors. I also observe that windows 7 aborts
> DrScheme when more than 2Gbyte of memory is being used. I have set the
> memory limit of DrScheme to infite and for windows to about 5 Gbyte. Under
> windows xp virtual memory did function well, but that was with 1 Gbyte of
> memory and trashing made it impossible to go up to 2 Gbyte. Now I have two
> cores of 2 Gbyte, but can't put my machine to thrash on page swapping.
> Jos
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: robby.findler at gmail.com
>> [mailto:robby.findler at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Robby Findler
>> Sent: 17 January 2011 16:14
>> To: Noel Welsh
>> Cc: Jos Koot; users at racket-lang.org
>> Subject: Re: [racket] Efficiency of tight loops in Racket
>>
>> I think the real reason is actually much sadder: no one on
>> the core team regularly uses windows. Well, until about a
>> month ago, when I started using windows for my development
>> tasks so hopefully that'll change.
>>
>> But I'm not sure what Jos is observing and I was expecting a
>> reply from Kevin or Matthew on this -- places are still
>> pretty experimental.
>>
>> Robby
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Noel Welsh
>> <noelwelsh at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I've seen lots of recent commits dealing w/ Windows 7 / 64-bit
>> > support, so I expect it is simply time. Windows is not as developer
>> > friendly as Unix so likely to receive new features last (as
>> a guess).
>> >
>> > N.
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Jos Koot
>> <jos.koot at telefonica.net> wrote:
>> >> Is there a specific reason why there is no parallel
>> support for place
>> >> on a dual core processor with Windows 7.
>> >> Thanks, Jos
>> > _________________________________________________
>> >  For list-related administrative tasks:
>> >  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
>> >
>
>


Posted on the users mailing list.