Thanks, that's very helpful. It's clear that the contract optimization is working in the old code but not the new code, and we need to fix that.
Sam On Dec 3, 2017 12:07 PM, "HiPhish" <hiph...@openmailbox.org> wrote: > Here is what happens when I run one of the array tests with the more > restrictive type specifications: > > OK, passed 100 tests. > Running time is 70.75% contracts > 75/106 ms > > (-> (recursive-contract (or/c (and/c hash? (and/c hash-equal ... 75 ms > (lib msgpack/pack.rkt):24:9 > pack 75 ms > > After reverting the commit I get zero overhead: > > OK, passed 100 tests. > Running time is 0% contracts > 0/7 ms > > The contract makes up 70% of the total runtime. I also looks like there is > no > contract generated after reverting. Should I run the profiler on some other > tests as well? > > On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 3:33:10 PM UTC+1, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> >> Running the contract profiler [1] on your code would be quite helpful. >> >> [1] https://docs.racket-lang.org/contract-profile/index.html >> >> Sam >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Racket Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
