Hi 1) Yes, we pre-compiled the function.
2) As I mentioned before, we tried the code with and without type declaration, it makes a difference. 3) The variable names turns out to be quite useful because this code will be eventually nested into a much larger project where it is convenient to have very explicit names. Thanks On Monday, June 16, 2014 12:13:44 PM UTC-4, Dahua Lin wrote: > > First, I agree with John that you don't have to declare the types in > general, like in a compiled language. It seems that Julia would be able to > infer the types of most variables in your codes. > > There are several ways that your code's efficiency may be improved: > > (1) You can use @inbounds to waive bound checking in several places, such > as line 94 and 95 (in RBC_Julia.jl) > (2) Line 114 and 116 involves reallocating new arrays, which is probably > unnecessary. Also note that Base.maxabs can compute the maximum of absolute > value more efficiently than maximum(abs( ... )) > > In terms of measurement, did you pre-compile the function before measuring > the runtime? > > A side note about code style. It seems that it uses a lot of Java-ish > descriptive names with camel case. Julia practice tends to encourage more > concise naming. > > Dahua > > > > On Monday, June 16, 2014 10:55:50 AM UTC-5, John Myles White wrote: >> >> Maybe it would be good to verify the claim made at >> https://github.com/jesusfv/Comparison-Programming-Languages-Economics/blob/master/RBC_Julia.jl#L9 >> >> >> I would think that specifying all those types wouldn’t matter much if the >> code doesn’t have type-stability problems. >> >> — John >> >> On Jun 16, 2014, at 8:52 AM, Florian Oswald <florian...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Dear all, >> > >> > I thought you might find this paper interesting: >> http://economics.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/comparison_languages.pdf >> > >> > It takes a standard model from macro economics and computes it's >> solution with an identical algorithm in several languages. Julia is roughly >> 2.6 times slower than the best C++ executable. I was bit puzzled by the >> result, since in the benchmarks on http://julialang.org/, the slowest >> test is 1.66 times C. I realize that those benchmarks can't cover all >> possible situations. That said, I couldn't really find anything unusual in >> the Julia code, did some profiling and removed type inference, but still >> that's as fast as I got it. That's not to say that I'm disappointed, I >> still think this is great. Did I miss something obvious here or is there >> something specific to this algorithm? >> > >> > The codes are on github at >> > >> > https://github.com/jesusfv/Comparison-Programming-Languages-Economics >> > >> > >> >>
