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: Guile 1.5.8 beta available for testing. Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 20:18:57 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <15725.5137.331738.600323@blauw.xs4all.nl> References: <20020828.153418.104036626.Sven.Hartrumpf@FernUni-Hagen.de> <87ptw312u3.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> <20020828.163839.74750750.Sven.Hartrumpf@FernUni-Hagen.de> 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 1030558491 27811 127.0.0.1 (28 Aug 2002 18:14:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2002 18:14:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17k7L6-0007E5-00 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 20:14:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17k7MR-0005xQ-00; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 14:16:11 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17k7Ly-0005v9-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 14:15:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17k7Lw-0005uw-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 14:15:41 -0400 Original-Received: from smtpzilla2.xs4all.nl ([194.109.127.138]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17k7Lv-0005us-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 14:15:39 -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 g7SIFbIn069125; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 20:15:37 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Sven Hartrumpf In-Reply-To: <20020828.163839.74750750.Sven.Hartrumpf@FernUni-Hagen.de> 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:1178 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1178 Sven.Hartrumpf@FernUni-Hagen.de writes: > > I.e., what processes show this behaviour. > > A medium-sized program doing lots of symbol, string, and list construction. > Really GC-intensive programs (around 30% of runtime with bigloo). The synthetic benchmark I use for GC testing spends at 25% an artificially high amount of time in GC -- Yours is Real Life and takes 30% GC time? Could you test what happens with current CVS GUILE? I revised the GC part of GUILE, and wonder how it compares to both 1.6 and other packages. Do you have any specifics regarding the GC of Bigloo? (Is it Boehm, generational, conservative?) -- 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