From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jean Abou Samra Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel,gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Guile optimizations slowing down the program? Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 11:01:27 +0100 Message-ID: <9F1BBE98-4FF0-4B50-8B45-7377B82DE373@abou-samra.fr> References: <4f80c059-4e10-1c0b-33d4-e73c66da297c@abou-samra.fr> <5f680556a912ad3826f9f722d2e6b5bbcb7cc76f.camel@telenet.be> <87pmmvwo5k.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26641"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: "guile-user@gnu.org" , Maxime Devos , "guile-devel@gnu.org" To: "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 09 11:02:34 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-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 1nRt9M-0006jJ-U9 for guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 11:02:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52748 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nRt9L-00028h-Kr for guile-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 05:02:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54474) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nRt8U-00028G-CD; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 05:01:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.133]:45427) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nRt8R-00033c-4Y; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 05:01:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [138.231.157.106] ([138.231.157.106]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue012 [212.227.15.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N1u2b-1o7zDl2bxR-012E9O; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 11:01:28 +0100 In-Reply-To: <87pmmvwo5k.fsf@web.de> X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11D257) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:nEA3+c20VsIygiV12E2kLTUNfJgzYx1loviTJ5JaV3rxUBQhjpV 042BqdnMNyyA7MnmhbcEZtRmZj2ncwfgw+JEhPn25icRJgbhOlSH0DKDprxTgI8PGDcpONk ntTwUL71Qf0PpGzGvki5zMei9jf9d1DckDUOqrMFz37IyNXJjV/Wji8ikWqKaZHWoKrWu9x /HqHlWLW1FPZjE6CqD9HQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:ze4r278NgDw=:odpEF/p7zsD1VMqePiOkDE xfqfFBIPK1i4vAKbiH0JOPjG/X94ra/tiAyBRftDWe0pbLHkfuWVZ8SI+qB45Qi3GFCvRCzxS 8GTlY9Y6X0T4fp8MW6AHUtEUlPGgHoie5jzDrA15f87cvxKTsAOdFKjTb0C3BuHn+N1Owrxxv tzVdsYyt7oySyu3EIhsZa6Qp+TMwnwOezvSa5E9R4/RJQL6xNFfA2gfZ1IDls7mFLQ/YqDyOp pWCVef2xWxReWpeGQCA1K6GGve/yiHAtaBBurGah/1Rj/KTGlsaqHT+ZS3xhuFO4fFAj3x43W KMz2iqBsov64BEMmzaC4H6wR7NtIZ6YILP+H0eNotw/pkV6XsWmQkw6g5u8ruGByagzLr7LS+ wuZCNUDfWTo/nIeSDh8RiKNETmVUmoMjQ5COTxsopRn9/R3xAFo878t9HLbcfwNuciAIZNdXm hfdZww+tyLPF8Zka6BcUjayHT88zCp+t03rz6gdbDZB7a3cgxPRaqZjCYZzO4UkwaQ4sZ76ce 0SFiX5c7WdY/jGdNFOCJJRGrZm4GdJxaS53pZySu/pAViVjCcsqKhRL12b+GVDuo+8ZdeJDiY VggbX6DyHq6hj+RzW4XEoKJBGi4MLayJrO62jeKuY4P1Ez3Kr2GxI7XylvkqYVoXZQj4xfWu4 n6gz7xpjmBFtnX73g0WtcYwPo4ZOLTiXGBA3jwG22aB+Xvsk5K67QkcN+ugrKijn8sOk= Received-SPF: none client-ip=212.227.126.133; envelope-from=jean@abou-samra.fr; helo=mout.kundenserver.de X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "guile-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.lisp.guile.devel:21161 gmane.lisp.guile.user:18173 Archived-At: > Le 9 mars 2022 =C3=A0 08:53, "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" = a =C3=A9crit : >=20 >=20 > Maxime Devos 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? >>=20 >> I don't think so, but I don't have a clue how this happens ... >=20 > 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 =E2=80=94 maybe even the overhead of > increased code-size from inlining? What is byte-compiled in these experiments is not the code from .ly files (w= hich is always evaluated via primitive-eval and not compiled), but the code f= rom LilyPond's .scm files. The compilation is done ahead of time, so its ove= rhead 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? >=20 >> 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 =E2=80=94 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 reas= on explained above, it doesn't factor into the speed of LilyPond. Thanks for responding! Jean >=20 > Best wishes, > Arne > --=20 > Unpolitisch sein > hei=C3=9Ft politisch sein, > ohne es zu merken. > draketo.de