So why not create a separate small process that passes on its parameters to
a running factor if it can find it, or starts a new one if it can't?
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:51 AM, Timothy Hobbs <timo...@hobbs.cz> wrote:
> One thing that occures to me, is that bash is cheeting. Bash actually
> takes longer than that to load to memory, but because it is already
> running on your system, on linux at least, the new bash process shares
> executable memory with the old bash processes. Factor probably loads
> everything to DATA sections of memory (which are read-write) and
> therefore linux cannot share all of that effort that has gone into
> loading the factor process. I'm not an expert on how this works, so
> please don't yell at me if I'm wrong ;). Have you tried loading the
> factor interpreter in the background and seeing if factor launches
> quicker while another factor process is running?
>
>
> On 02/01/2017 16:31, pet...@riseup.net wrote:
> > On 2017-02-01 15:16, John Benediktsson wrote:
> >> I did that and it's not a huge amount, maybe 10-20%. We need to
> >> profile and see what else it's doing. Like I said, low hanging fruit
> >> are aplenty.
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Feb 1, 2017, at 12:37 AM, pet...@riseup.net wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 2017-02-01 00:19, John Benediktsson wrote:
> >>>> Part of the startup time is calling all of our "startup hooks", of
> >>>> which I
> >>>> have 35 right now in my Factor instance, in all of these
> >>>> vocabularies:
> >>>>
> >>>> {
> >>>> "alien"
> >>>> "destructors"
> >>>> "alien.strings"
> >>>> "io.backend"
> >>>> "source-files.errors"
> >>>> "compiler.units"
> >>>> "vocabs"
> >>>> "io.files"
> >>>> "vocabs.loader"
> >>>> "command-line"
> >>>> "threads"
> >>>> "cpu.x86.features"
> >>>> "io.thread"
> >>>> "core-foundation.run-loop"
> >>>> "environment"
> >>>> "io.backend.unix:signal-pipe-thread"
> >>>> "io.launcher"
> >>>> "random.unix"
> >>>> "bootstrap.random"
> >>>> "io.sockets:ipv6-supported?"
> >>>> "openssl"
> >>>> "tools.crossref"
> >>>> "cocoa"
> >>>> "io.files.temp"
> >>>> "tools.deprecation"
> >>>> "core-foundation"
> >>>> "vocabs.cache"
> >>>> "vocabs.refresh.monitor"
> >>>> "opengl.gl"
> >>>> "opengl"
> >>>> "ui"
> >>>> "core-text.fonts"
> >>>> "core-text"
> >>>> "tools.errors.model"
> >>>> "ui.tools.error-list"
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm sure a lot of that could be delayed in smart ways to make startup
> >>>> time
> >>>> faster, that's what I meant by low hanging fruit, but also not
> >>>> something
> >>>> that anyone is working on right now.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>> John.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:40 PM, <pet...@riseup.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2017-01-30 18:14, Timothy Hobbs wrote:
> >>>>>> If you are on linux, you might try this very new feature:
> >>>>>> https://criu.org/Main_Page
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 01/30/2017 17:29, Jim Mack wrote:
> >>>>>>> You could also set up factor as a local web server, and send bash
> >>>>>>> requests to it through a web page, and it would be able to
> >>>>>>> accomplish
> >>>>>>> them locally (or remotely) and report you the results. It would
> >>>>>>> be a
> >>>>>>> quick round-trip cycle with great feedback and the ability to
> >>>>>>> bookmark
> >>>>>>> commands.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 1:39 PM, <pet...@riseup.net
> >>>>>>> <mailto:pet...@riseup.net>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 2017-01-29 16:20, John Benediktsson wrote:
> >>>>>>>> It would be nice to improve startup time. I imagine some low
> >>>>>>> hanging
> >>>>>>>> fruits if we looked deeply into it. I'll make a note to get that
> >>>>>>> on my
> >>>>>>>> list, unless someone looks into it sooner.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 28, 2017, at 2:25 PM, pet...@riseup.net
> >>>>>>> <mailto:pet...@riseup.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> I spend a lot of time writing small scripts, often in bash.
> >>>>>>> That is
> >>>>>>>>> becoming a more and more painful task as bash is a nice-enough
> >>>>>>>>> language
> >>>>>>>>> on the first look but in the end it seems to go out of it's way
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> trip
> >>>>>>>>> you up with every character you type. I don't mean to rant, I
> >>>>>>> know
> >>>>>>>>> it's
> >>>>>>>>> an old language that has to keep a lot of backward
> >>>>>>> compatibility and
> >>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>> actually still serves very well for what it was designed for,
> >>>>>>> as long
> >>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>> your script stays <100 lines. Still, there's a lot to be
> >>>>>>> desired.
> >>>>>>>>> Factor is a cool language, it's very expressive, mature, has a
> >>>>>>> lot of
> >>>>>>>>> libraries and has all sorts of tricks up its sleaves to bend it
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> your
> >>>>>>>>> will (much like lisp in that regard). It would be a fun
> >>>>>>> experiment to
> >>>>>>>>> write a library or EDSL (embedded DSL) for bash-like scripting.
> >>>>>>>>> However
> >>>>>>>>> there's a bone to be picked:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> $ time bash -c ''
> >>>>>>>>> bash -c '' 0.00s user 0.00s system 94% cpu 0.004 total
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> $ time factor-vm -e=''
> >>>>>>>>> factor-vm -e='' 0.12s user 0.05s system 99% cpu 0.178 total
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I know one can create a custom image and maybe cut down on the
> >>>>>>> startup
> >>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>> bit, but my question is - would it be possible to cut it down
> >>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>> bash's
> >>>>>>>>> startup time *and* still have all the necessary vocabularies in
> >>>>>>> it? I
> >>>>>>>>> don't want to know the startup time with a small image that has
> >>>>>>> like
> >>>>>>>>> nothing in it, I can quickly test that myself. I'd need help to
> >>>>>>> answer
> >>>>>>>>> -
> >>>>>>>>> if you imagine the use case I'm talking about, include all the
> >>>>>>> vocabs
> >>>>>>>>> that use case would need and make all other possible
> >>>>>>> optimizations (if
> >>>>>>>>> there are) without sacrificing too much, can the startup reach
> >>>>>>> similar
> >>>>>>>>> times?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> ------------
> >>>>>>>>> Peter Nagy
> >>>>>>>>> ------------
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> ------------------
> >>>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >>>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>> Factor-talk mailing list
> >>>>>>>>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>>>> <mailto:Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net>
> >>>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> >>>>>>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> ------------------
> >>>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >>>>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>> Factor-talk mailing list
> >>>>>>>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>>>> <mailto:Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net>
> >>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> >>>>>>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi John,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> you think you can reach similar startup times? That would be
> >>>>>>> really
> >>>>>>> cool. I guess your todo list is rather long though.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> As a side note, are there other concatenative languages you
> >>>>>>> know I
> >>>>>>> could
> >>>>>>> look at?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> ------------
> >>>>>>> Peter Nagy
> >>>>>>> ------------
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> ------------------
> >>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >>>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> Factor-talk mailing list
> >>>>>>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>>>> <mailto:Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net>
> >>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> >>>>>>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> ------------------
> >>>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >>>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>> Factor-talk mailing list
> >>>>>>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> ------------------
> >>>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >>>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> Factor-talk mailing list
> >>>>>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> >>>>> Thanks for the interesting links/ideas :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> ------------
> >>>>> Peter Nagy
> >>>>> ------------
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> ------------------
> >>>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >>>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Factor-talk mailing list
> >>>>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> >>>>>
> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> >>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Factor-talk mailing list
> >>>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> >>> Is there any dumb way for me to test what would the startup time be
> >>> have
> >>> I removed all the hooks? That would show what is the actual overhead
> >>> all
> >>> the hooks bring.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> ------------
> >>> Peter Nagy
> >>> ------------
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> >>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Factor-talk mailing list
> >>> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> >> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Factor-talk mailing list
> >> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
> > I would consider contributing if you tell me the startup time can be cut
> > down to 5% of the current one :) That would make the runtime usable for
> > short scripts in shell pipelines and such.
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Factor-talk mailing list
> Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Factor-talk mailing list
Factor-talk@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
