On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Antonio Cuni <anto.c...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 31/03/11 22:05, Andrew Brown wrote: > > > python double-interpreted: > 78m (did not finish) > > pypy-c (with jit) double-interpreted: 41m 34.528s > > this is interesting. We are beating cpython by more than 2x even in a > "worst > case" scenario, because interpreters in theory are not a very good target > for > tracing JITs. > However, it's not the first time that we experience this, so it might be > that > this interpreter/tracing JIT thing is just a legend :-) > > Well the issue with tracing an interpreter is the large number of paths, a brainfuck interpreter has relatively few paths compared to something like a Python VM. > > translated interpreter no jit: 45s > > translated interpreter jit: 7.5s > > translated direct to C, gcc -O0 > > translate: 0.2s > > compile: 0.4s > > run: 18.5s > > translated direct to C, gcc -O1 > > translate: 0.2s > > compile: 0.85s > > run: 1.28s > > translated direct to C, gcc -O2 > > translate: 0.2s > > compile: 2.0s > > run: 1.34s > > these are cool as well. We are 3x faster than gcc -O0 and ~3x slower than > -O1 > and -O2. Pretty good, I'd say :-) > > ciao, > anto > _______________________________________________ > pypy-dev@codespeak.net > http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev > Alex -- "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire) "The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
_______________________________________________ pypy-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
