From: Siegfried Gonzi <siegfried.gonzi@stud.uni-graz.at>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: Coyote Gulch test in Caml (was Re: [Caml-list] speed )
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 11:34:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3E2A7F4B.2000603@stud.uni-graz.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200301181749.48295.oleg_inconnu@myrealbox.com>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-19 9:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-03 16:00 [Caml-list] speed onlyclimb
2003-01-03 11:38 ` [Caml-list] speed Clemens Hintze
2003-01-03 11:47 ` [Caml-list] speed Noel Welsh
2003-01-02 16:45 ` Chet Murthy
2003-01-03 13:32 ` Xavier Leroy
2003-01-02 17:52 ` Chet Murthy
2003-01-03 14:53 ` Sven Luther
2003-01-03 15:28 ` Erol Akarsu
2003-01-02 17:53 ` Coyote Gulch test in Caml (was Re: [Caml-list] speed ) Chet Murthy
2003-01-03 15:10 ` Shawn Wagner
2003-01-03 15:56 ` Oleg
2003-01-04 18:31 ` Xavier Leroy
2003-01-18 22:49 ` Oleg
2003-01-18 23:50 ` Shawn Wagner
2003-01-20 21:23 ` David Chase
2003-01-20 21:39 ` Nickolay Semyonov-Kolchin
2003-01-21 0:54 ` Brian Hurt
2003-01-21 13:09 ` David Chase
2003-01-21 13:15 ` Daniel Andor
2003-01-21 20:26 ` Nickolay Semyonov-Kolchin
2003-01-19 10:33 ` Siegfried Gonzi
2003-01-19 10:34 ` Siegfried Gonzi [this message]
2003-01-21 9:56 ` [Caml-list] Re: Coyote Gulch test in Caml Xavier Leroy
2003-01-21 15:57 ` Brian Hurt
2003-01-27 16:58 ` Daniel Andor
2003-01-28 8:27 ` Christian Lindig
2003-01-05 1:13 ` [Caml-list] speed Brian Hurt
2003-01-05 1:48 ` Michael Vanier
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3E2A7F4B.2000603@stud.uni-graz.at \
--to=siegfried.gonzi@stud.uni-graz.at \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
/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 NNTP newsgroup(s).