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

It's Racket vs. libmpfr via an FFI call, and the `stress' macro does 
everything I need for that. I've got a commit ready, which I'll push as 
soon as DrDr doesn't complain about missing "mpfr_set_z_2exp" - which 
should be after it tests my last push.

Neil ⊥

On 12/06/2012 04:21 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> Ah ya, I guess I meant the "common" sub-dir.
>
> In any case, I think that Neil won't be comparing Racket vs something,
> but just measuring the performance of a piece of Racket
>
> Jay
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth at ccs.neu.edu
> <mailto:samth at ccs.neu.edu>> wrote:
>
>     On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccarthy at gmail.com
>     <mailto:jay.mccarthy at gmail.com>> wrote:
>      > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Neil Toronto
>     <neil.toronto at gmail.com <mailto: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
>     <mailto: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
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jay McCarthy <jay at cs.byu.edu <mailto:jay at cs.byu.edu>>
> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University
> http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay
>
> "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93