Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization
What about (let ([set (lambda (a) (set 1 2 a))]) (for/list ([x (in-set (set 3))]) x)) ? Tobias On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:24:12 +0100, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an improvement. Thanks, -Ian - Original Message - From: Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:58:09 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization I think that would be an ad hoc optimization in each `in-'. For example, (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx () [[(id) (_ st)] in `racket/set' could change to (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx (set) [[(id) (_ (set v))] #`[(id) (in-value v)]] [[(id) (_ st)] At Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:50:49 -0500 (EST), J. Ian Johnson wrote: It would be great to optimize singletons out of comprehensions, since I (and probably others) have macros that expand into singleton constructors that are much better suited to just be a rebinding. (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-set (set n))]) (random k cpu time: 340 real time: 338 gc time: 16 (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-value n)]) (random k cpu time: 120 real time: 118 gc time: 0 Is this easily added to for.rkt? -Ian _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev -- - Tobias Hammer DLR / Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics Muenchner Str. 20, D-82234 Wessling Tel.: 08153/28-1487 Mail: tobias.ham...@dlr.de _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization
That works fine (i.e., does not get changed to `in-value'). Matching `set' as a literal in `syntax-case' works by identifier binding, not symbolically. If `set' has a different binding than the one exported by the module, then the optimizing case doesn't match. At Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:49:15 +0100, Tobias Hammer wrote: What about (let ([set (lambda (a) (set 1 2 a))]) (for/list ([x (in-set (set 3))]) x)) ? Tobias On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:24:12 +0100, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an improvement. Thanks, -Ian - Original Message - From: Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:58:09 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization I think that would be an ad hoc optimization in each `in-'. For example, (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx () [[(id) (_ st)] in `racket/set' could change to (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx (set) [[(id) (_ (set v))] #`[(id) (in-value v)]] [[(id) (_ st)] At Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:50:49 -0500 (EST), J. Ian Johnson wrote: It would be great to optimize singletons out of comprehensions, since I (and probably others) have macros that expand into singleton constructors that are much better suited to just be a rebinding. (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-set (set n))]) (random k cpu time: 340 real time: 338 gc time: 16 (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-value n)]) (random k cpu time: 120 real time: 118 gc time: 0 Is this easily added to for.rkt? -Ian _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev -- - Tobias Hammer DLR / Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics Muenchner Str. 20, D-82234 Wessling Tel.: 08153/28-1487 Mail: tobias.ham...@dlr.de _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization
That's not free-identifier=? so it wouldn't be optimized. -Ian - Original Message - From: Tobias Hammer tobias.ham...@dlr.de To: Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 4:49:15 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization What about (let ([set (lambda (a) (set 1 2 a))]) (for/list ([x (in-set (set 3))]) x)) ? Tobias On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 19:24:12 +0100, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an improvement. Thanks, -Ian - Original Message - From: Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:58:09 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization I think that would be an ad hoc optimization in each `in-'. For example, (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx () [[(id) (_ st)] in `racket/set' could change to (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx (set) [[(id) (_ (set v))] #`[(id) (in-value v)]] [[(id) (_ st)] At Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:50:49 -0500 (EST), J. Ian Johnson wrote: It would be great to optimize singletons out of comprehensions, since I (and probably others) have macros that expand into singleton constructors that are much better suited to just be a rebinding. (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-set (set n))]) (random k cpu time: 340 real time: 338 gc time: 16 (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-value n)]) (random k cpu time: 120 real time: 118 gc time: 0 Is this easily added to for.rkt? -Ian _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev -- - Tobias Hammer DLR / Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics Muenchner Str. 20, D-82234 Wessling Tel.: 08153/28-1487 Mail: tobias.ham...@dlr.de _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
[racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization
It would be great to optimize singletons out of comprehensions, since I (and probably others) have macros that expand into singleton constructors that are much better suited to just be a rebinding. (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-set (set n))]) (random k cpu time: 340 real time: 338 gc time: 16 (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-value n)]) (random k cpu time: 120 real time: 118 gc time: 0 Is this easily added to for.rkt? -Ian _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization
I think that would be an ad hoc optimization in each `in-'. For example, (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx () [[(id) (_ st)] in `racket/set' could change to (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx (set) [[(id) (_ (set v))] #`[(id) (in-value v)]] [[(id) (_ st)] At Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:50:49 -0500 (EST), J. Ian Johnson wrote: It would be great to optimize singletons out of comprehensions, since I (and probably others) have macros that expand into singleton constructors that are much better suited to just be a rebinding. (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-set (set n))]) (random k cpu time: 340 real time: 338 gc time: 16 (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-value n)]) (random k cpu time: 120 real time: 118 gc time: 0 Is this easily added to for.rkt? -Ian _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization
Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an improvement. Thanks, -Ian - Original Message - From: Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:58:09 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization I think that would be an ad hoc optimization in each `in-'. For example, (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx () [[(id) (_ st)] in `racket/set' could change to (define-sequence-syntax *in-set (lambda () #'in-set) (lambda (stx) (syntax-case stx (set) [[(id) (_ (set v))] #`[(id) (in-value v)]] [[(id) (_ st)] At Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:50:49 -0500 (EST), J. Ian Johnson wrote: It would be great to optimize singletons out of comprehensions, since I (and probably others) have macros that expand into singleton constructors that are much better suited to just be a rebinding. (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-set (set n))]) (random k cpu time: 340 real time: 338 gc time: 16 (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-value n)]) (random k cpu time: 120 real time: 118 gc time: 0 Is this easily added to for.rkt? -Ian _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
