Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-03 Thread Trey Harris
That is really lovely. I don’t know what criteria are used for Rosetta Code, but the article’s implementation is the clearest “program as concrete explication of algorithm” I’ve ever seen. It took me *years* to understand RSA’s internals to the point that I could explain it if asked to in an

Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-03 Thread Thor Michael Støre
Yeah, it just got really noticeable when I had to run a relatively short script over and over again, one that would have appeared to finish instantly on Perl 5. Startup time just stood out first since that’s about fifteen times higher on 6 vs stock 5. But I also see now that my full script has

Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-03 Thread Patrick R. Michaud
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 04:26:10PM +0200, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote: > > On 02 Oct 2016, at 11:00, Thor Michael Støre wrote: > > Is this normal startup performance? > > https://www.promptworks.com/blog/public-keys-in-perl-6 > > I wonder what would be needed to run this in

Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-03 Thread Elizabeth Mattijsen
> On 02 Oct 2016, at 11:00, Thor Michael Støre wrote: > Is this normal startup performance? https://www.promptworks.com/blog/public-keys-in-perl-6 I wonder what would be needed to run this in Perl 5, module wise, and CPU wise. Liz

Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-03 Thread Kaare Rasmussen
On 2016-10-03 12:14, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote: Wrt to Pm’s timing of perl 5 with Moose: if you actually want to have most of Perl 6’s capabilities in Perl 5 with Moose, you will need to load quite a few MooseX:: classes as well. Which cannot have a positive effect on load time. Right. But

Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-03 Thread Elizabeth Mattijsen
$ time install/bin/nqp -e '' real0m0.025s user0m0.017s sys 0m0.006s Liz > On 03 Oct 2016, at 12:45, Brock Wilcox wrote: > > It seems like Moose vs built-in-oop/mop is a very indirect comparison. Now > I'm wondering what nqp or moarvm startups are like.

Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-03 Thread Brock Wilcox
It seems like Moose vs built-in-oop/mop is a very indirect comparison. Now I'm wondering what nqp or moarvm startups are like. On Oct 3, 2016 06:14, "Elizabeth Mattijsen" wrote: > > On 02 Oct 2016, at 11:00, Thor Michael Støre > wrote: > > > > Hey

Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-02 Thread Timo Paulssen
On my machine it's about 0.1 seconds. The machine i'm using has this CPU in it: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4600U CPU @ 2.10GHz And it runs off an SSD. - Timo

Re: Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-02 Thread Patrick R. Michaud
On Sun, Oct 02, 2016 at 11:00:38AM +0200, Thor Michael Støre wrote: > Thormicks-MacBook-Pro-3:~ thormick$ time perl6 -e "say 'foo'" > foo > > real 0m0.205s > user 0m0.150s > sys 0m0.045s > > [...] > > Foo indeed! ~200ms for this seems awfully slow to me. On another hand, my machine shows:

Startup performance on OS X

2016-10-02 Thread Thor Michael Støre
Hey everyone! Is this normal startup performance? Thormicks-MacBook-Pro-3:~ thormick$ time perl6 -e "say 'foo'" foo real0m0.444s user0m0.166s sys 0m0.067s Thormicks-MacBook-Pro-3:~ thormick$ time perl6 -e "say 'foo'" foo real0m0.202s user0m0.148s sys 0m0.044s