From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id KAA11627; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 10:43:32 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA10808 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 10:43:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from teutates.kfunigraz.ac.at (TEUTATES.kfunigraz.ac.at [143.50.129.26]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h0J9hVv26128 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 10:43:31 +0100 (MET) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by teutates.kfunigraz.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0B743D23D5 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 10:43:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from teutates.kfunigraz.ac.at ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (teutates.kfunigraz.ac.at [127.0.0.1:10024]) (amavisd-new) with ESMTP id 11953-02 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 10:43:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from stud.uni-graz.at (IGAM08AV.kfunigraz.ac.at [143.50.39.35]) by teutates.kfunigraz.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 981DB3D2387 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 10:43:27 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <3E2A7EE0.7060105@stud.uni-graz.at> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 11:33:04 +0100 From: Siegfried Gonzi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: Coyote Gulch test in Caml (was Re: [Caml-list] speed ) References: <3E15B3B3.3040106@163.com> <20030103071042.T22850@speakeasy.org> <20030104193118.A26208@pauillac.inria.fr> <200301181749.48295.oleg_inconnu@myrealbox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk Oleg wrote: >On Saturday 04 January 2003 01:31 pm, Xavier Leroy wrote: > >>Apparently, the ocamlopt-generated code >>offers less instruction-level parallelism than the g++-generated code >>for the float computations. Still, I haven't really understood where >>the factor of 2 comes from. >> > >It's been a couple of weeks. I'm wondering if you got any new insights into >this? > I am wondering whether they did analysize the Bigloo (Scheme) results: [according to Manuel based on code by S. Gonzi; see comp.lang.scheme] Compiler usr+usr -----------------------------------------------------------+--------------- ocamlopt -unsafe -noassert -inline 2: 95.01s bigloo -Obench -jvm (jdk1.3.1): 55.73s java (jdk1.3.1): 52.53s bigloo -Obench -copt "-ffast-math -fomit-frame-pointer -O3": 40.57s gcc -ffast-math -fomit-frame-pointer -O3: 38.37s Btw: the Stalin compiler produces code (note: common Scheme operators) which runs faster than the C++ version even. S. Gonzi ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners