On 2011-03-25, at 18:12, Marcus Denker wrote: > > On Mar 25, 2011, at 5:51 PM, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> >> On Mar 25, 2011, at 5:46 PM, Camillo Bruni wrote: >>>> >>> >>> Arguing with absolute values is a bit dangerous: >>> >>> But it makes >>> 13ms / 17ms * 100% = 76% => 25% speed improvement! in COG >>> 50ms / 60ms * 100% = 83% => 17% faster > > So for Cog, you get this counter-intuitive result is because Cog > executes the overhead loop faster in combination with not jitting > what you wanted to test.
I didn't run the benchmarks, I just listed the results mariano provided. Just to show that they do not provide a valid argument for removal of the method. So we have a nice Benchmarking framework on sqeaksource which we should use instead of relying on some pseudo valid results. I do not have to time right now to do so... but I expect the overhead to be neglectable in COG, since it should be fairly easy to JIT this in... > As the doit is *not* Jited, it executes as fast as in the intepreter case. > You see a higher percentage just because the base overhead loop > is executed faster and the thing you test gets a larger share of the > runtime. > > Marcus > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > >
