[REBOL] Re: Language Comparisons
From: moliad::gmail::com at: 17-Oct-2008 0:35
hi all,
well for me, in the btree test (a GC oriented test)... just removing the 2
return statements, shrank times by more than 30% in runs I did. since this
is a b-tree nothing can be pre-allocated, unless we rebuild the algorythm
itself with some 'trick', so all the burden is on the GC itself.
removing parens further improved speed by 3% on average
now, we all know rebol's GC is pretty basic and has trouble dealing with
very large datasets (exponentially slow, maybe even cubed) so this test was
hard to further improve, because the main work is internal to the
interpreter. If I compare this new benchmark, we are still 17 times slower
than python... which is, well... a bit sad. its possible that using structs
and preallocating a big chunk of them at a time might have improved the
speed, but I don't have time right now to test this.
this leads me to...
people often forget that rebol is not about implementing the same logic
again in a nifty little syntax.
its a different computing model, and to be effective, applications must be
tuned to its way of thinking. in most cases, many of the usual computer
science philosophy is useless in rebol. Many algorythms, just arent needed
in the first place.
BUT!
obviously, the fact that nothing in rebol can be compiled (although parts of
it could be jit compiled) is a big drawback in speed. MOST modern languages
do SOME jit compilation, some even automatically store it and reuse it,
further improving later application runs.
IMHO rebcode, should be part of A final R2 version, even if its buggy.
we`ve got enface/enpro/enview etc... we should also have one with rebcode
enabled (encode) and let users decide if they can cope with the
bugs/caveats. in most benchmarks I've seen rebcode was at least 3 times
faster and often up to 10 times quicker for simple algorythms.
I'm sure some people would implement rebcoded functions we could share on
rebol.org and include as libs in many apps. some smart rebolers might even
implement rebcode compilers to convert parts of normal rebol code or single
funcs, into rebcode.
any how, I was just passing... took a little (and much needed) break to play
around with this benchmark.
have fun
-MAx
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:03 PM, Carl Read <carl-cybercraft.co.nz> wrote:
