From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Lisp's future Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:46:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: <54193A70.9020901@member.fsf.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1410990418 23512 80.91.229.3 (17 Sep 2014 21:46:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:46:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Kristian Nygaard Jensen , emacs devel To: James Cloos Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 17 23:46:51 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XUN3l-0006bR-7F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 23:46:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47443 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUN3k-0004QI-MB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:46:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53880) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUN3a-0004Q6-W2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:46:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUN3T-00064t-Gz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:46:34 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:21920) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XUN3T-00063q-D9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:46:27 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ArUGAIDvNVNFpZEG/2dsb2JhbABZgwaDSsA9gRcXdIIlAQEBAQIBViMQCzQSFBgNJIgECNIZF456B4Q4BKkZgWqDTCE X-IPAS-Result: ArUGAIDvNVNFpZEG/2dsb2JhbABZgwaDSsA9gRcXdIIlAQEBAQIBViMQCzQSFBgNJIgECNIZF456B4Q4BKkZgWqDTCE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,753,1389762000"; d="scan'208";a="90129209" Original-Received: from 69-165-145-6.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.145.6]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 17 Sep 2014 17:46:21 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 59A6A603CD; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 17:46:21 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:53:45 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.181 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:174468 Archived-At: >> It is the lisp which sage supports (they have a funding grant which >> requires that sage be installable from source on just about anything >> which has an existing C compiler) and the maxima tests consistantly >> show it as second only to compiled-to-machine-code lisps like sbcl. Note that this speed is probably only for "compiled code". ECL has two evaluation methods: - "byte-code interpreter". - "compilation to native code via C" (requires a local installation of a C compiler). I just tried a silly microbenchmark to get an idea of the byte-code interpreter's performance: (let ((x 0)) (dotimes (i 10000000) (setq x (- i x))) x)) and on my machine, it took 3.5s compared. This isn't super-fast compared to Emacs-24.3 which takes 6.7s in the purely interpreted case and 1.7s in the byte-compiled case. Of course, this is a silly benchmark, but I think this indicates that ECL focuses on performance of compiled code (the above silly code runs in 0.7s when compiled, FWIW). Stefan