Re: [racket-dev] for loop singleton optimization
That's not free-identifier=? so it wouldn't be optimized. -Ian - Original Message - From: "Tobias Hammer" To: "Matthew Flatt" , "J. Ian Johnson" Cc: "dev" 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 wrote: > Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an > improvement. > Thanks, > -Ian > - Original Message - > From: "Matthew Flatt" > To: "J. Ian Johnson" > Cc: "dev" > 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 > wrote: > > > Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an > > improvement. > > Thanks, > > -Ian > > - Original Message - > > From: "Matthew Flatt" > > To: "J. Ian Johnson" > > Cc: "dev" > > 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
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 wrote: Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an improvement. Thanks, -Ian - Original Message - From: "Matthew Flatt" To: "J. Ian Johnson" Cc: "dev" 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
Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an improvement. Thanks, -Ian - Original Message - From: "Matthew Flatt" To: "J. Ian Johnson" Cc: "dev" 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
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
[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
