Re: ANN: faster zipper implementation
Thanks Zach! I've pulled your changes to 0.3.0-SNAPSHOT. Updated benchmark: Case: :clojure.zip Evaluation count : 75480 in 60 samples of 1258 calls. Execution time mean : 805.666773 µs Execution time std-deviation : 4.815877 µs Execution time lower quantile : 797.942766 µs ( 2.5%) Execution time upper quantile : 816.578299 µs (97.5%) Found 2 outliers in 60 samples (3. %) low-severe 2 (3. %) Variance from outliers : 1.6389 % Variance is slightly inflated by outliers Case: :fast-zip Evaluation count : 297900 in 60 samples of 4965 calls. Execution time mean : 202.892179 µs Execution time std-deviation : 848.456881 ns Execution time lower quantile : 201.212286 µs ( 2.5%) Execution time upper quantile : 204.187311 µs (97.5%) Found 1 outliers in 60 samples (1.6667 %) low-severe 1 (1.6667 %) Variance from outliers : 1.6389 % Variance is slightly inflated by outliers I did try adding some inline forms, but they didn't seem to help. See this branch: https://github.com/akhudek/fast-zip/tree/no-protocol+inline On Sunday, June 30, 2013 7:46:53 PM UTC-4, Zach Tellman wrote: > > This is really cool, thanks for doing this. I was able to eke out another > 1.8x speedup by replacing '=' with 'identical?' for the keyword comparisons > [1]. There also might be further room for improvement by defining inline > forms for some of the smaller functions. > > Zach > > [1] > https://github.com/ztellman/fast-zip/commit/ee7a64630389f36a539771658586a093369f7939 > > On Sunday, June 30, 2013 1:18:05 PM UTC-7, Alexander Hudek wrote: >> >> I've updated the clojure.zip implementation to use records internally. >> This >> achieves a speedup of roughly 2x. You can find the library below and on >> clojars: >> >> https://github.com/akhudek/fast-zip >> >> It's a drop in replacement for clojure.zip in terms of interface and >> usage. >> However, since the internal representation has changed, fast-zip >> locations >> cannot be used with the clojure.zip implementation. E.g. you cannot >> create a zipper with fast-zip, then use clojure.zip/next on the result. >> You >> must use fast.zip.core/next instead. >> >> In addition to the micro-benchmark provided, I've tried this in a larger >> project >> that makes extensive use of zippers and found a similar speedup. >> >> Comments and suggestions welcome. >> >> Alex >> > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: ANN: faster zipper implementation
This is really cool, thanks for doing this. I was able to eke out another 1.8x speedup by replacing '=' with 'identical?' for the keyword comparisons [1]. There also might be further room for improvement by defining inline forms for some of the smaller functions. Zach [1] https://github.com/ztellman/fast-zip/commit/ee7a64630389f36a539771658586a093369f7939 On Sunday, June 30, 2013 1:18:05 PM UTC-7, Alexander Hudek wrote: > > I've updated the clojure.zip implementation to use records internally. This > achieves a speedup of roughly 2x. You can find the library below and on > clojars: > > https://github.com/akhudek/fast-zip > > It's a drop in replacement for clojure.zip in terms of interface and > usage. > However, since the internal representation has changed, fast-zip locations > cannot be used with the clojure.zip implementation. E.g. you cannot > create a zipper with fast-zip, then use clojure.zip/next on the result. > You > must use fast.zip.core/next instead. > > In addition to the micro-benchmark provided, I've tried this in a larger > project > that makes extensive use of zippers and found a similar speedup. > > Comments and suggestions welcome. > > Alex > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: ANN: faster zipper implementation
This is really cool, thanks for taking the time to do this. I was able to eke out another 1.8x speedup by changing the keyword equality checks with 'identical?' [1], and there might be some further room for improvement by defining inline forms for some of the smaller functions. Zach [1] https://github.com/ztellman/fast-zip/commit/ee7a64630389f36a539771658586a093369f7939 On Sunday, June 30, 2013 1:18:05 PM UTC-7, Alexander Hudek wrote: > > I've updated the clojure.zip implementation to use records internally. This > achieves a speedup of roughly 2x. You can find the library below and on > clojars: > > https://github.com/akhudek/fast-zip > > It's a drop in replacement for clojure.zip in terms of interface and > usage. > However, since the internal representation has changed, fast-zip locations > cannot be used with the clojure.zip implementation. E.g. you cannot > create a zipper with fast-zip, then use clojure.zip/next on the result. > You > must use fast.zip.core/next instead. > > In addition to the micro-benchmark provided, I've tried this in a larger > project > that makes extensive use of zippers and found a similar speedup. > > Comments and suggestions welcome. > > Alex > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
