I didn’t quite understand your long version. Are you saying that
** on your specific machine **
Haskell’s “worst” is 50ms, OCaml is 3ms, and Racket’s is 120ms?
FWIW, I can’t imagine Haskell code using set! for this benchmark,
so I rewrote it in the obvious way (think monad). On my little laptop,
the “worst” display went down by 25%.
#lang racket/base
(define window-size 200000)
(define msg-count 1000000)
(define get-time current-inexact-milliseconds)
(define (message n)
(make-string 1024 (integer->char (modulo n 256))))
(define (push-msg chan id-high worst)
(define before (get-time))
(define id-low (id-high . - . window-size))
(define added (hash-set chan id-high (message id-high)))
(define result (if (id-low . < . 0) added (hash-remove added id-low)))
(define after (get-time))
(define duration (after . - . before))
(values result (max worst duration)))
(define-values (_ worst)
(for/fold
([chan (make-immutable-hash)]
[worst 0.0])
([i (in-range msg-count)])
(push-msg chan i worst)))
(displayln worst)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-dev/BAACF1B3-AA19-4794-9C60-D33F1B7B14C2%40ccs.neu.edu.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
