From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Type declarations in Elisp Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2023 09:56:25 +0000 Message-ID: <87pm3732ye.fsf@localhost> References: <87il984vxv.fsf@localhost> <03fc79f4-a532-71b1-0de9-8e52bdf3f138@gmail.com> <87msykfwym.fsf@localhost> <83lee3tjla.fsf@gnu.org> <87wmxm7iu2.fsf@dataswamp.org> <878r9wg9l3.fsf@localhost> <87edjo7f4k.fsf@localhost> <87r0noqudo.fsf@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22716"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Emanuel Berg , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andrea Corallo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 28 11:57:07 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 1qaYzb-0005hR-Bp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:57:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qaYyb-000866-0U; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 05:56:05 -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 1qaYyY-00084D-Ji for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 05:56:02 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qaYyV-00043h-Mw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 05:56:02 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DD1D240027 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:55:56 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1693216556; bh=05AHEFZramQN72XwEddZ6Ck3U5QBqNLBiCqkae58vd8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=WA+9tW0hxZgDcx/Ewa7rkYT2Qch58iNKXU3tw4SMYHSsAndoHEA222mhJha/ffkB/ in6lA0+6d2XIO1B5lS2zDRVLXUUfcJ0E66MxJa7qOnPXo6xyUrQpdX4w737oo4JELE 7vNSaN8KmUREsYKaxUmle05ab+kPHSGG/tzlB4MZCg/ri/8PZajvGjRMduaXWnuIF2 SjKgJzfDcVU21Gsfd8xrAKcBwMFwYnV5tN9TNW+Jbiid+kiG0+f/+GgeC9ewTFN9dX Lag4w+meMHr7p7ROR5Al0qmhNgyG6NG/xLR30V6J5rDwNxQSDB8BUiuW2MRVmm/9/G JAjPXRYGSHRbQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4RZ5Xq4xDFz9sDD; Mon, 28 Aug 2023 11:55:55 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -53 X-Spam_score: -5.4 X-Spam_bar: ----- X-Spam_report: (-5.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:309411 Archived-At: Andrea Corallo writes: >> emacs -batch -l .../elisp-benchmarks.el -f elisp-benchmarks-run > > Mmmh but AFAIR elisp-benchmarks always native compiles at speed 3. It is... a questionable default. With speed 2, I get | fibn | 1.03 | 0.00 | 0 | 1.03 | 0.07 | | fibn-named-let | 1.71 | 0.00 | 0 | 1.71 | 0.08 | | fibn-rec | 3.71 | 0.00 | 0 | 3.71 | 0.13 | | fibn-tc | 4.44 | 0.00 | 0 | 4.44 | 0.04 | Elisp bubble: 0.66 sec vs CBCL 0.66 sec Elisp bubble-no-cons: 1.11 sec vs SBCL 0.81 sec Elisp fibn: 1.03 sec vs. SBCL 0.07 sec Elisp fibn-rec: 3.71 sec vs. SBCL 0.55 sec Elisp fibn-tc: 4.44 sec vs. SBCL 0.41 sec perf on all the fibn tests shows that recursion is still going through `funcall' - most of the time is spent in Ffuncall, funcall_general, and funcall_subr. Runtime typechecking (check_number_coerce_marker) is also taking quite a bit of time. arithcompare is strange. AFAIU, comparisons in the benchmarks are (= n 0)/(= n 1). Why are they so costly? 20.25% emacs emacs [.] Ffuncall 12.70% emacs emacs [.] arith_driver 9.59% emacs emacs [.] funcall_general 9.46% emacs emacs [.] funcall_subr 8.70% emacs emacs [.] check_number_coerce_marker 7.61% emacs emacs [.] arithcompare 6.63% emacs emacs [.] arithcompare_driver 6.17% emacs fibn-07298b84-44e7557d.eln [.] F656c622d6669626e2d7463_elb_fibn_tc_0 5.95% emacs emacs [.] Fplus 4.09% emacs fibn-07298b84-44e7557d.eln [.] F656c622d6669626e2d726563_elb_fibn_rec_0 1.98% emacs fibn-07298b84-44e7557d.eln [.] F656c622d6669626e_elb_fibn_0 1.85% emacs emacs [.] Feqlsign 1.60% emacs fibn-07298b84-44e7557d.eln [.] F656c622d6669626e2d6e616d65642d6c6574_elb_fibn_named_let_0 0.98% emacs emacs [.] Flss 0.64% emacs emacs [.] Fminus -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at