Here's three emails that accidentally didn't get sent to the list. On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Dan Roberts <ademan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andrew, > Did you ever try your interpreter with the 99 bottles program? I got my > interpreter down faster than the beef interpreter ~4s vs ~15s on mandelbrot, > however even with that speed, both 'bf' and 'beef' trounced my interpreter > by an absurd amount. It seems like it probably was a problem with my code > base, when I first saw you were working on this I meant to ask you to try > 99bottles.bf and see if you had similar problems. I haven't had a chance > to examine where the problem is coming from though. > > Cheers, > Dan > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Andrew Brown <brow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Dan, > Did you mean to send this to the list as well? I only ask because it's easy > to hit "Reply" instead of "Reply All". > > Regardless, I have a 99 bottles program, in the comments it says it's > written by Andrew Paczkowski. I haven't mentioned it just because it runs > absurdly fast: 0.02 seconds or so (compared with 0.2s for running the py > code on cpython), so I didn't consider it a good test. I wanted something > that took a bit longer. > > I just searched for another and found one by Raphael Bois, but that runs in > 0.04 seconds. > > Perhaps you're using a different version of this program that's less > efficient and runs faster? (or maybe this really is just that fast?) > > Also, the mandelbrot program that I included in my repo takes 8.4 seconds > to run on my computer. Not quite the 4 second time you're getting (have you > published your interpreter anywhere? I'd like to look at it) I have a > feeling I've taken this interpreter as far as it will go without doing any > more intelligent inspection of the bf code directly. > > -Andrew > On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Dan Roberts <ademan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey, > Yeah, that's the second or third time I didn't reply to all lately :-/ > And my interpreter is on paste.pocoo.org somewhere, I can paste it again > when I go home today. I suspect there's something wrong with it though, > considering you're getting proper performance on 99bottles, it takes about 3 > minutes here! (On the same system where it wins on mandelbrot by >66% > against 'beef' or bf whichever one is faster) One immediately obvious > difference was your use of the bracket map, which I think is an awesome > idea. I may adopt it, currently I calculate how far backwards/forwards to > travel at "runtime" instead of preprocessing it. I made it pure so that it > would be constant folded by the JIT, but I suppose the 1000 iterations > before the JIT kicks in (per loop) could explain a large performance > difference. I could probably combine both techniques and cache the results > at runtime, by the second run, it'll be a dict lookup, so it'll be jitted > essentially the same, and I won't have to think about parsing to find > matching braces :-) > > If you can think of a good way to bring this discussion back on the mailing > list that'd be fine. > > Cheers, > Dan >
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
