[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others
From: |
Joris van der Hoeven |
Subject: |
Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others |
Date: |
Sun, 23 May 2004 11:29:30 +0200 (CEST) |
On Sat, 22 May 2004, David MENTRE wrote:
> I have redone most of Doug Bagley's Language Shootout on Schemes, Lisps
> and other languages (python as a well known reference, gcc and g++ for
> max speed reference, ocaml because it is fast and I like it :-).
Thanks a lot; this is really very helpful and exhaustive. Could you please
try some of the other Scheme's which were mentioned by Gilles and others
on this list a month or so ago? It would be interesting to find the best
interpreted (maybe using byte-code) Scheme implementation. We should also
investigate whether we may use compiled Schemes.
> Doug's benches are interesting because there are both compute intensive
> ones (sieve, matrix, moments, ...) and string manipulation ones
> (spellcheck, wc, wordfred, ...).
Yes, yes, very exhaustive.
> All the scripts & results are available at:
> http://www.linux-france.org/~dmentre/texmacs/scheme/scheme-shoot.tar.gz
Thanks.
> - python and guile are very slow, guile being very very very slow (Oh
> surprise! ;)
;^(((
> - cmucl (common lisp) and bigloo (scheme) are close to each other and
> are both very fast. Both of them are compiled and I don't know how
> they can be used and their speed in interpreter mode;
We should investigate that.
> - regarding interpreters, OCaml in bytecode (ocamlb) is the better, but
> it is not a Lisp-like language;
Would it be possible (easy) to *simulate* scheme from within OCaml
(if necessary without continuations, which we cannot use anyway
currently (unfortunately)). When loading a scheme program,
we might rewrite it as an Ocaml program and execute it.
I think that this mainly supposes that there are equivalents
for the define-macro construct.
> I have not investigated other Joris' criteria (licence, capabilities,
> ...).
We can do that later (except for the license issue; no need
to try proprietary software; we do not want to use it).
Let us first concentrate on raw speed.
- [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, David MENTRE, 2004/05/22
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, David MENTRE, 2004/05/23
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, Joris van der Hoeven, 2004/05/23
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, David MENTRE, 2004/05/23
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, David MENTRE, 2004/05/23
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, Joris van der Hoeven, 2004/05/23
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, David Allouche, 2004/05/23
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others,
Joris van der Hoeven <=
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, Joris van der Hoeven, 2004/05/23
- Re: [Texmacs-dev] First results on Schemes, Lisps & others, David MENTRE, 2004/05/23