Laurent Sansonetti wrote:
For instance, the optimizations that are (and will be) implemented in
the experimental branch are not random but were selected after having
profiled a big MacRuby/Cocoa application and found many areas where we
performed badly. I assume that other implementations are using similar
techniques.
The interesting thing about many of these microbenchmarks is that a
substantial part of MacRuby's performance seems to come from one key
optimization: recursive calls.
MacRuby (experimental) fib(30) with fcalls (fib(...):
0.060000 0.000000 0.060000 ( 0.053868)
0.050000 0.000000 0.050000 ( 0.053773)
0.050000 0.000000 0.050000 ( 0.055541)
0.050000 0.000000 0.050000 ( 0.049992)
0.060000 0.000000 0.060000 ( 0.054645)
MacRuby (experimental) fib(30) with calls (self.fib(...)):
0.180000 0.000000 0.180000 ( 0.182371)
0.180000 0.000000 0.180000 ( 0.178691)
0.170000 0.000000 0.170000 ( 0.177174)
0.170000 0.000000 0.170000 ( 0.179554)
0.180000 0.000000 0.180000 ( 0.181848)
The latter numbers are roughly the same as JRuby performance without
recursion optimization (with or without fcall).
The recursion opt is actually pretty clever...I experimented with it a
few weeks back (achieving similar results, http://gist.github.com/67329)
and backed off temporarily to work on other things. I also wasn't sure
how common it would be in real code, nor was I sure it could be done
safely while maintaining all Ruby semantics. Maybe we'll be able to
figure that out together. :)
- Charlie
_______________________________________________
MacRuby-devel mailing list
MacRuby-devel@lists.macosforge.org
http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macruby-devel
