From: Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr>
To: "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <arne_bab@web.de>
Cc: "guile-user@gnu.org" <guile-user@gnu.org>,
Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be>,
"guile-devel@gnu.org" <guile-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Guile optimizations slowing down the program?
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 11:01:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9F1BBE98-4FF0-4B50-8B45-7377B82DE373@abou-samra.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pmmvwo5k.fsf@web.de>
> Le 9 mars 2022 à 08:53, "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" <arne_bab@web.de> a écrit :
>
>
> Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> writes:
>> Jean Abou Samra schreef op wo 09-03-2022 om 00:31 [+0100]:
>>> In summary, the less Guile optimizes, the faster LilyPond runs. Is that
>>> something expected?
>>
>> I don't think so, but I don't have a clue how this happens ...
>
> Do I understand it correctly that Lilypond has lots of snippets that are
> executed exactly once? In that case it could be expected that the
> overhead of optimization dominates — maybe even the overhead of
> increased code-size from inlining?
What is byte-compiled in these experiments is not the code from .ly files (which is always evaluated via primitive-eval and not compiled), but the code from LilyPond's .scm files. The compilation is done ahead of time, so its overhead can't be responsible for these results.
> Also the new baseline compiler is already pretty good:
> https://wingolog.org/archives/2020/06/03/a-baseline-compiler-for-guile
> Maybe this?
>
>> There is also a felicitous feedback effect in that because the
>> baseline compiler is much smaller than the CPS compiler, it takes less
>> time to macro-expand — https://wingolog.org/archives/2020/06/03/a-baseline-compiler-for-guile
As far as I understand, this is about the speed of compilation. For the reason explained above, it doesn't factor into the speed of LilyPond.
Thanks for responding!
Jean
>
> Best wishes,
> Arne
> --
> Unpolitisch sein
> heißt politisch sein,
> ohne es zu merken.
> draketo.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-09 10:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-08 23:31 Guile optimizations slowing down the program? Jean Abou Samra
2022-03-09 7:28 ` Maxime Devos
2022-03-09 7:53 ` Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
2022-03-09 10:01 ` Jean Abou Samra [this message]
2022-03-09 10:25 ` Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9F1BBE98-4FF0-4B50-8B45-7377B82DE373@abou-samra.fr \
--to=jean@abou-samra.fr \
--cc=arne_bab@web.de \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=guile-user@gnu.org \
--cc=maximedevos@telenet.be \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).