[racket-dev] [plt] Push #25860: master branch updated

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccarthy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Neil Toronto <neil.toronto at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/06/2012 02:08 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 12:44 PM,  <ntoronto at racket-lang.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> | Reimplemented really simple FFI functions (e.g. mpfr-prec, mpfr-exp)
>>>> to
>>>> | avoid calling overhead
>>>
>>>
>>> If you have meaningful benchmarks where this makes a difference, that
>>> may be useful to Matthew, since he recently was working on improving
>>> the FFI's code generation.
>>
>>
>> I've got some benchmarks showing via timing loops that pulling a _long
>> directly out of an _mpfr takes just over half the time it takes to call
>> libmpfr to do it. It's enough to make me want to rewrite simple things like
>> `bfnegative?' in Racket.
>>
>> I won't, though, if Matthew has near-future Big Plans. Or Medium Plans.
>>
>> I see we have "tests/racket/benchmarks". Should I just drop the code
>> there, or is there some kind of procedure or protocol I should follow?
>
>
> Generally that directory is for benchmark Racket against other languages, so
> the program has to be cross-compatible. I think you are talking about a
> stress test, which can be used to monitor Racket's performance against
> itself in the future to catch regressions. That's in tests/racket/stress.

I don't think that's right about the `benchmarks` directory -- the
`shootout` directory is not cross-compatible, and we have Typed Racket
benchmarks that are mostly used for benchmarking TR against plain R.

Sam