Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

No, I did the same thing, and only the first hundred tests work normally, the other 100 hand for several minutes. Maybe my computer is too weak, it's an early 2009 iMac with a 2.66GHz Core2Duo and 8GB of RAM. I also ran `raco setup msgpack` after making the change to the source file to make

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

I'm not able to replicate that (see transcript below). Is there something else I should be doing? [samth@huor:~/tmp/MsgPack.rkt (master) plt] git diff diff --git a/unpack.rkt b/unpack.rkt index 30c87a9..3806548 100644 --- a/unpack.rkt +++ b/unpack.rkt @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ [else (error

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

When I change the return type of `unpack` to `Packable` instead of an explicit union of types the map packing test (`test/pack/map.rkt`) hangs. https://gitlab.com/HiPhish/MsgPack.rkt/blob/master/unpack.rkt#L83 https://gitlab.com/HiPhish/MsgPack.rkt/blob/master/test/pack/map.rkt -- You received

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

Ok, looking more at the commit, I think this is not actually a bug anywhere, but really an unfortunate combination of things that I don't have an idea for improving at the moment. Sorry for not realizing that earlier. First, I think you should just go back to using `Any` in the type for `pack`

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

Anything more I can do? On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 6:11:42 PM UTC+1, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > > 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. > -- You received this message because you

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

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" wrote: > Here is what happens when I run one of the array tests with the more >

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

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

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

Running the contract profiler [1] on your code would be quite helpful. [1] https://docs.racket-lang.org/contract-profile/index.html Sam On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 9:29 AM, HiPhish wrote: > Is there anything I can do to help investigate the issue? I have reverted my >

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

Is there anything I can do to help investigate the issue? I have reverted my commit for the time being, and it's a difference like day and night. On Sunday, December 3, 2017 at 12:36:16 AM UTC+1, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > > I don't think the mutable/immutable issue should be as significant as

Re: [racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

I don't think the mutable/immutable issue should be as significant as it seems here. Using the Any type shouldn't perform better the way you describe, so we need to look more at what the actual contracts are doing. Sam On Dec 2, 2017 6:24 PM, "HiPhish" wrote: > Now

[racket-users] Re: Typed Racket has lowered my performance

Now that I think about it, changing the types to be immutable is not really correct either. There is no reason users should not be able to serialise a mutable list, vector or hash table, just as they can serialise any mutable scalar as well. The result of unpacking bytes could be immutable, but