On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Subramanya Sastry <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > I've filed a bug report for that: >> > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JRUBY-4263 >> > >> > Another possibility I was hoping to get some good results was to use >> > pre-compiled rb files into classes. But that turned out even worse >> > performance (10x worse or so): >> > >> > http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JRUBY-4273 >> >> We used to have serialized AST files and they were about 5-10% faster >> than our old parser (which was 2-3 times slower than our current >> parser when warm). Serialization could be a good idea, but from some >> experimentation it does not make a big difference. > > When we get to the new IR-based interpreter, also worth experimenting with > is reading in the IR directly (equivalent to reading in .s files or .o files > even).
Yes, this is a very good idea. One issue with out AST is that it ends up being quite large. Much larger than equivalent Ruby source. So a faster read but more to read. The IR may end up being as small as the Ruby source but also quick to read. Certainly much simple parser/loader. -Tom -- blog: http://blog.enebo.com twitter: tom_enebo mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
