From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Han-Wen Nienhuys Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: lazy sweeping. Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 17:17:31 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <15685.23691.537182.583426@meddo.cs.uu.nl> References: <15684.32520.154258.348830@blauw.xs4all.nl> <200207290431.VAA08976@morrowfield.regexps.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1027955864 32069 127.0.0.1 (29 Jul 2002 15:17:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 15:17:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZCHH-0008L7-00 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 17:17:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZCHd-0001HD-00; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 11:18:05 -0400 Original-Received: from aurora.cs.uu.nl ([131.211.80.20] helo=mail.cs.uu.nl) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17ZCH7-0001Ev-00 for ; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 11:17:33 -0400 Original-Received: from meddo.cs.uu.nl.cs.uu.nl (meddo.cs.uu.nl [131.211.80.91]) by mail.cs.uu.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BED71CB253; Mon, 29 Jul 2002 17:17:31 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Tom Lord In-Reply-To: <200207290431.VAA08976@morrowfield.regexps.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.03 under Emacs 21.2.1 Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:883 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:883 lord@regexps.com writes: > > > Nothing spectacular. But now checkout ... the startup time! > (this is the time for starting guile, and then pressing ^D) > > > This is not a very good measure of effective start-up time in > SCM-based (incremental graph translation) Schemes. Odds are you have > a lot of untranslated code in that image, and when I add my My intent was not measuring the performance of eval() and friends, simply the act of reading in code into GUILE. If the new GC can be attributed for the improvement, then it seems that reading in the files generates a lot of garbage. The cost of that collecting that is now smeared out over future allocations. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | hanwen@cs.uu.nl | http://www.cs.uu.nl/~hanwen/ _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel