[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl
From: |
Peter Bex |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:22:28 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.2.3i |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 02:11:41PM +0200, Sascha Ziemann wrote:
> I tried to use Chicken for a job I would use normally Perl for to find
> out whether Chicken might be a useful alternative.
A great test!
> And now hold on tight! It takes more than one minute for the same data:
>
> real 1m16.540s
> user 1m14.849s
> sys 0m0.664s
>
> And there is almost no significant performance boost by compiling it:
>
> real 0m1.810s
> user 0m1.664s
> sys 0m0.140s
The most important question is: which version of Chicken is this?
There have been massive optimizations done to irregex (the regex
engine used in Chicken) between 4.6.0 and 4.7.0
> So the questions are:
>
> - What is wrong with the Chicken code?
At first glance it looks fine.
> - How can I profile the code?
Build it with "csc -profile ...", then run it. It will
produce a profile file which you can read with "chicken-profile".
> - Why is there no difference between csi and csc?
Probably because the inefficiency is in irregex, which is already
compiled; the bottleneck is not in your code, so making it faster
by compiling it won't help.
Cheers,
Peter
--
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
experience much like composing poetry or music."
-- Donald Knuth