On Mon, 24 Aug 2015 11:24:33 -0400, Rickard Andersson wrote: > > With regards to the measurements; as is obvious from this mailchain, I > know about and use the `time` form. It hasn't skewed the results. > > Using the optimizing coach in DrRacket has yielded no results, really. I > tried using it and there wasn't any advice on what to do for speedups > (unless that advice isn't very discoverable, I don't know.). > > The only meaningful difference I discovered for TR was using 6.1.1, as > apparently there was an optimization that'd been borked for 6.2.0 and > onwards. > > I'm still curious about speed-ups with TR. I had expected it to perform > better than Racket, but I guess the big win is that you get contracts > with better performance instead of much faster, brittle code?
TR can perform better than plain Racket, but not always. TR mostly performs local optimizations that remove dispatch / checks in various operations, so only programs using these operations will see any improvements. Areas where you can expect wins are float- and complex-number-intensive computations, as well as some data structure accesses. Vincent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
