Unfortunately I'm an emacs acolyte + Geiser and as a result was not getting the zos built that DrRacket would have given me for free. So the slow down I experienced were more than what they would be for most people. Self induced issue. Ultimately I pushed down a lot of the "standard" code into several raco linked local planet libs and as they stabilized started raco fileinject'ing them locally. This helped quite a bit.
Somehow I missed 'raco make' to build the core non-lib code. Thanks for that one. Ray On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Robby Findler <[email protected]>wrote: > DrRacket does this automatically. > > But the default settings will make .zo files with debugging on -- > maybe there is some bad Typed Racket / errortrace interaction that > slows down compilation significantly? > > Robby > > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Ray - > > > > Thanks for the happy story! > > > > As for compile times, what I typically do is use `raco make' on the > > command line to compile things, which means that typechecking doesn't > > have to happen repeatedly. For a 10k line project, I would expect > > this to make a substantial difference when changing files at the > > leaves of the hierarchy. For the root of the hierarchy, there's not > > much to be done with the current architecture of Racket other than > > making Typed Racket faster (which we're working on). > > > > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Ray Racine <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> This weekend I completed a 3 weekend exercise converting just short of > 10K > >> wc -l lines of racket code. All told it took 3 weekends to get there. > I > >> did it because it appears 10K lines is about my conceptual limit given > my > >> slovenly documentation habits. > >> The old code worked just fine, however it was no longer > readily apparent to > >> my why this should be the case. > >> Some observations: > >> > >> 95% of the time adding signatures was very straight forward. > >> In <2% I had some difficulties, some self inflicted, some hitting some > rough > >> areas where things are not yet competed in typed Racket, I was always > able > >> to come up with something that worked. > >> Was surprised by the number of sunny day assumptions in my original code > >> Typing forced me to handle all "cases". The code is now more robust > then > >> before. > >> The typing syntax overall is really quite good. It did not come across > as > >> an afterthought bolt-on. > >> require/typed works cleanly to "lift" untyped racket code from 3rd party > >> libs into typed land. > >> The time it takes to initially type check a high up in the module > hierarchy > >> module does start to impact the development cycle however. > >> > >> Overall the doing and completing of the migration took a pile of code on > the > >> verge of anarchy and put it back under control. I feel confident it > could > >> double in size a number of times and remain so. > >> I think typed racket is a huge win. Controversially, (oh boy) I'd go as > far > >> to say Racket should just go 100% typed from bone to guts, top to > bottom. > >> Racket - The Programming Language With The (Soon To Be) Most Advanced > Type > >> System In The World. *whew* > >> Who'd a thunk it. > >> > >> _________________________________________________ > >> For list-related administrative tasks: > >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > sam th > > [email protected] > > > > _________________________________________________ > > For list-related administrative tasks: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > > > -- The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. - Marcus Aurelius
_________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
