Hi Haiwei, AFAIK there isn't any way to see the actual instructions that the JIT is generating. Why do you think it would be helpful in this case?
It may be helpful to use raco decompile, however -- that allows you to see what the bytecode version of your program looks like (which is what is actually being fed to the JIT). -James Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 17:53:34 +0800 > From: Haiwei Zhou <[email protected]> > To: Danny Yoo <[email protected]> > Cc: users <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [racket] The performance of fannkuch-redux > Message-ID: > <CABLXuO9nJAUa=Xn7779377NPnoQX6Ze3Tdkf6bvF= > [email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Updated a parallel version to https://github.com/highfly22/fannkuch-redux > It takes about 1m50s in the four cores PC, while the script in the shoutout > takes about 4m30s. It looks like the task division is not perfect. > > I am just curious on the native implement of JIT. How to dump assemble code > after JIT? > > When I try to define count-flips as a macro, racket complains "to many > forms"? What does that mean? > > Thanks, > Haiwei > > > On 24 February 2013 11:03, Danny Yoo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > It's amazing fast. If it is only 6 times slower than C version. If > > >> > parallelizing the time consuming operations, it would be 2x slower > > than > > >> > C > > >> > version in the four cores CPU. > > >> > > >> > > >> Do you mean the version you've written, or the one in the Racket > > >> benchmark suite? > > > > > > It's the one in the benchmark suite. > > > > > > What does the code look like if you add the parallelizing? Can you > > show us? Thanks! > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20130225/8e591afb/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
