On 19/02/18 13:18, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> This characterization is still good: 
> — fully typed programs might run significantly faster than untyped programs 
> (30%)
> — the performance of partially typed programs is all over the map (10% slower 
> to 10000% slower)
> — it remains difficult to predict whether the conversion of a single module 
> introduces a serious slowdown 
> — slowdowns are caused by high frequency or large composite “crossings” of 
> typed-untyped module boundaries 
>       the allocation cost of wrappings of mutable and/or h-o values, and the 
> wrappers themselves when these values are accessed. 

Thanks, interesting to see that fully typed programs run faster though.
>From your 4th point, one could assume that the more a program is typed,
the less crossing there will be and therefore the better the performance
will get?

> If you want more specific information, we can post a journal submission that 
> compares several Racket implementations (6.2, 6.3, and 6.4) on a range of 
> programs using functional to ho object-oriented style. 

That would certainly be appreciated.

Paulo Matos

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 racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to