Message from discussion
Very poor Lisp performance
Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.tele.dk!not-for-mail
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2005 20:54:29 +0200
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jens_Axel_S=F8gaard?= <use...@soegaard.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: Very poor Lisp performance
References: <42fdd7a8$0$97130$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net> <2005081321013216807%raffaelcavallaro@pasdespamsilvousplaitmaccom> <42ff04a9$0$78285$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk> <42ff1c6e$0$1279$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net> <3m95opF15sleiU1@individual.net> <42ff662a$0$97128$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net> <m3mznksdx9.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
In-Reply-To: <m3mznksdx9.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <42ff9364$0$657$edfadb0f@dread12.news.tele.dk>
Organization: TDC Totalloesninger
NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.62.83.99
X-Trace: 1124045668 dread12.news.tele.dk 657 80.62.83.99:20024
X-Complaints-To: abuse@post.tele.dk
jayessay wrote:
> Jon Harrop <use...@jdh30.plus.com> writes:
>>Well, it's relative. Most of the other Lisp/Scheme implementations were two
>>orders of magnitude slower. Stalin gets even closer than SBCL.
> So do many CL implementations on many benchmarks when "properly"
> written. Several have been shown here in the past. Typically this
> starts with the original posting "showing" how bad CL is supposed to
> be when comparing optimized C/C++ with naively written CL. It also
> often ends with the CL version beating the optimized C/C++ version.
>
> Most typical of all is that such benchmarks (including this ray
> tracing thing) don't have much of anything interesting to say about
> anything.
The comp.lang.lisp thread on Almabench comes into mind.
Rif summed it up pretty nicely:
So what have we learned? We confirmed what we pretty much
knew: you can write a C program in CL, at which point the
relative speed of your C and CL versions will depend on the
relative quality of the code generation.
I am sure Jon can pick up some nice tricks in the thread.
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/ae59ca28867ced78?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&rnum=110>
--
Jens Axel Søgaard
|
