From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Bignum performance Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2023 03:57:07 +0200 Message-ID: <87zg24nhn0.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: <874jkzllqq.fsf@yahoo.com> <2dec78a7-76e0-8789-4d20-7f0f6effe28a@gmail.com> <87pm3neei7.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87cyzjdvpq.fsf@dataswamp.org> <871qfyfgjd.fsf@localhost> <87h6ojrath.fsf@dataswamp.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35287"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:4dOCrJPo/HnJXewxY8yfRw0rGU8= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 03 06:35:21 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qcepU-0008vr-Sb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 06:35:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qcenW-0004Fk-JZ; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 00:33:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qccMr-00071f-Ek for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Sep 2023 21:57:37 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qccMc-0000AG-3z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Sep 2023 21:57:37 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qccMa-0008UG-5k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 03:57:20 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 03 Sep 2023 00:32:56 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309927 Archived-At: Yet another file, https://dataswamp.org/~incal/cl/bench/inclist-type-hints.cl Here we have type hints, answering my own questions a while back how to do it! It is done with `declare', as in this (declare (optimize (speed 3) (safety 0))) for the concerned function, then they are actually put to use with `the'. ("Type hints enabled"?) Elisp vs SBCL, in seconds: (faster 5.73 0.675997) ; CL is 748% faster Note that the optimization worked a lot better for SBCL than in did for Elisp, if we compare with the non-optimized (i.e. no type hints) file I just posted [1] [it hasn't arrived yet on this ML as I type this, but should arrive] - anyway (faster 5.86 5.73) ; 2% - Elisp vs `cl-the' Elisp (faster 1.635993 0.675997) ; 142% - SBCL vs `the' SBCL SBCL become 142% faster with the optimization, and the Elisp - just 2%. Another interesting thing is that here, superficially or on the interface level at least, we have the same type hint possibilities as in SBCL. [1] https://dataswamp.org/~incal/cl/bench/inclist.cl -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal