As I understand it, both Ra and the R 'compiler' package are bytecode
JITs, so roughly like Java '.class' and Emacs '.elc' files. There is no
current method that compiles R into machine code, which is what JIT in
the JVM does, and which is why Java does so well in the language
shootout [1].
D
Ooops, wrong JIT! Dirk is absolutely right. I meant to say see enableJIT is
the compiler package, see
http://www.r-statistics.com/2012/04/speed-up-your-r-code-using-a-just-in-time-jit-compiler/
I second Dirk's comments on Ra.
Antonio
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 18 June 2012 at 11:55, Antonio Piccolboni wrote:
|
|
| On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:09 PM, c s wrote:
|
| Another is
| R. I believe R currently doesn't have a JIT compiler (I haven't
| checked lately), and hence the very useful Rcpp fills in the
| performance gap.
|
|
|
|
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:09 PM, c s wrote:
> Another is
> R. I believe R currently doesn't have a JIT compiler (I haven't
> checked lately), and hence the very useful Rcpp fills in the
> performance gap.
>
Still work in progress but see http://www.milbo.users.sonic.net/ra/jit.html.
Doesn't
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 11:09 PM, c s wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 4:21 AM, Douglas Bates wrote:
>> These comments may provoke a heated response from Conrad but,
>> if so, I don't plan to respond further. Eigen and Armadillo are different
>> approaches, each with their own advantages and disa
