Waldek Hebisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> > And, if possible, on various OS and various lisps.
> 
> I just finished the standard tests using sbcl, gcl and Closure CL
> (former openmcl) on 2.2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo running 64-bit Debian.  I see
> no regressions.

Wonderful.  Remains MS Windows and MaxOSX, I believe?

> Timing for test suite are:
...

> I think conclusion from measurements is clear: the SPADCALL patch gives
> significant speedup for sbcl (of order 15-25%) while impact on gcl and
> Closure CL is much smaller (probably within measurement noise).

Shouldn't the timings (safety 0) be quite different from the default -- I
believe it's (safety 1), isn't it?

What the SPADCALL patch does, is, as you know, 

1 check whether the argument is a function, call it if this is the case,
2 otherwise fail.

instead of

1 check whether the argument is a function, call it if this is the case,
1a otherwise check whether symbol-function is set, call it if so, 
2 otherwise fail.

This *should* give some speedup, but I think the expensive check for the
algebra (not the interpreter!) is 1.

Martin


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to