[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] performance of bignums
From: |
Peter Bex |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] performance of bignums |
Date: |
Sun, 28 Jun 2015 21:47:30 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:09:19PM +0200, Peter Bex wrote:
> I already removed the use of the "format" egg (the code contains a
> commented-out version that relies only on "display"), and even
> completely disable the println call. It's hard to be sure, but it
> *looks* like the majority of the time is being spent in the division
> procedures.
So far it seems my implementation of Burnikel/Ziegler division is rather
unstable, performance-wise. If I disable burnikel/ziegler so it falls
back to the traditional gradebook method, the benchmark finishes in
a quarter of the time it takes to run with BZ enabled.
It's not just that the BZ implementation is really bad: it does improve
performance on Chudnovsky's "digits of pi" calculation benchmark by a
factor of four or so. I will do further experimentation. I also noticed
a bug in the gradebook method, which I will have to address as well.
Cheers,
Peter
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: [Chicken-users] performance of bignums, cowan, 2015/06/25
Re: [Chicken-users] performance of bignums, John Long, 2015/06/26