From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Han-Wen Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: status: separation of expansion/optimization/memoization/execution Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 04:03:41 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <15692.35709.693187.793720@blauw.xs4all.nl> References: <15691.51367.455100.152498@blauw.xs4all.nl> Reply-To: hanwen@cs.uu.nl 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 1028426427 25477 127.0.0.1 (4 Aug 2002 02:00:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2002 02:00:27 +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 17bAgz-0006co-00 for ; Sun, 04 Aug 2002 04:00:26 +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 17bAhb-00031a-00; Sat, 03 Aug 2002 22:01:03 -0400 Original-Received: from smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.138]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17bAh7-00030j-00 for ; Sat, 03 Aug 2002 22:00:33 -0400 Original-Received: from blauw.xs4all.nl (blauw.xs4all.nl [213.84.26.127]) by smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g7420Wco094272; Sun, 4 Aug 2002 04:00:32 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Dirk Herrmann In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 7.05 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:946 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:946 dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de writes: > However, didn't you say that you had some nice benchmark application > called lilypond ;-) If there was a significant change due to your gc :) I ran some tests on the anomalous machine (50% gc time), now it's back down to 15 to 20 % -- still a lot, but credible. Compared to the old scheme there is some slight advantage (gc-times down from 70 to 25), perhaps due to the new malloc trigger, but I also increased the segment size (I fixed a silly bug in our use of putenv). -- 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