On 04/25/2011 10:32 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
Anyone recognize this? (git up is git pull --ff-only --stat --all)
C:\Users\Administrator\git\exp\pltgit up
Fetching origin
error: unable to resolve reference refs/remotes/origin/master: No error
From git:plt
! [new branch] master -
On 04/21/2011 01:07 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
-B- When it comes to raw computational performance (ignore loading Racket, start from
REPL and run a single game -- 10 seconds), my implementation is faster than Python
(but barely) and one of the Java implementations. But one Java
On 04/29/2011 12:10 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
On Apr 29, 2011, at 11:31 AM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
Scheme is usually a liability when someone used it in school years ago
(other than with HtDP).
Sad.
but true. Exacerbated by lecturers who refused to keep up with the
world around
On May 1, 2011, at 2:58 AM, D Herring wrote:
On 04/21/2011 01:07 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
-B- When it comes to raw computational performance (ignore loading Racket,
start from REPL and run a single game -- 10 seconds), my implementation is
faster than Python (but barely) and one of
Thanks! (I don't know why, but I'm just getting this message now.)
Robby
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 2:04 AM, D Herring dherr...@tentpost.com wrote:
On 04/25/2011 10:32 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
Anyone recognize this? (git up is git pull --ff-only --stat --all)
On 2011-05-04 12:04 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
I still believe that the Java implementation (just under 1s without
their 'Google' contract) benefits from typed dispatches.
Maybe it does, but it's almost certain that it is benefiting from inline
caching at send sites (i.e. dynamic type
As I was reading a paper, I encountered the word 'cache' and remembered that I
had wanted to implement a caching version of the central method in my central
data structure. That took me about 10 minutes, and I now have good times for
the game:
with contracts: 1.8s per game
without ctrcts:
-Original Message-
From: dev-boun...@racket-lang.org
[mailto:dev-boun...@racket-lang.org] On Behalf Of Matthias Felleisen
Sent: 04 May 2011 22:58
To: Tony Garnock-Jones; D Herring
Cc: dev List
Subject: Re: [racket-dev] Inline caching (was Re: my '312'
this semester,how we
The attached (highly experimental) patch seems to improve the
performance of normal sends (in the case of a cache hit) by roughly 100%
- 150%. The difference between this mere factor of two improvement and
the factor of six-through-ten I was seeing earlier is, I speculate,
related to
On 2011-05-04 18:49:13 -0400, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
The attached (highly experimental) patch seems to improve the
performance of normal sends (in the case of a cache hit) by roughly
100% - 150%. The difference between this mere factor of two
improvement and the factor of six-through-ten I
On 2011-05-04 6:54 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
Wow, impressive! I've been benchmarking with the DrRacket interactive
tests already for contracts, so I can run my test driver and get some
numbers for that.
That'd be great. I mean, it'll probably just break, but if it doesn't...
it'd be
On 05/04/2011 01:57 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
On 2011-05-04 12:04 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
I still believe that the Java implementation (just under 1s without
their 'Google' contract) benefits from typed dispatches.
Maybe it does, but it's almost certain that it is benefiting from
Wow. Why didn't I think of asking for this before :-)
On May 4, 2011, at 7:11 PM, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
On 05/04/2011 01:57 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
On 2011-05-04 12:04 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
I still believe that the Java implementation (just under 1s without
their 'Google'
20 minutes ago, Justin Zamora wrote:
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 3:20 AM, D Herring dherr...@tentpost.com wrote:
You might emphasize that Racket is a new language, borrowing the
best parts of Scheme (and other languages?) and extending it with
these features...
A sentence like that would be a
Justin is right other than the Java part. Eli is right with the
amendment of -1 for the suggestion that Java has good parts worth
borrowing. (-:
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
20 minutes ago, Justin Zamora wrote:
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 3:20 AM, D Herring
On 05/04/2011 04:49 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
The attached (highly experimental) patch seems to improve the
performance of normal sends (in the case of a cache hit) by roughly 100%
- 150%. The difference between this mere factor of two improvement and
the factor of six-through-ten I was
Racket is the coolest programming language on earth.
Spend a bit of time with it, and your programs will
grow more beautiful in front of your eyes every day
of your life.
_
For list-related administrative tasks:
On 05/01/2011 02:20 AM, D Herring wrote:
Also collect a set of cool programs for people to use. It is easier
for people to understand this was implemented in Racket than Racket's
features might let me make that. Many people make decisions based on
first impressions. When I was an undergrad, I
On 05/04/2011 03:57 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
A simple experiment I just performed suggests that a monomorphic
inline cache hit can reduce the time needed for a send in Racket from
350ns to around 60ns, which is a massive win. I've attached the
program I used to measure this, FWIW. (Run it
19 matches
Mail list logo
