3 ms·

>>it gives you code that's faster than gcc with the options at the bottom of this page<< 1) Here are the timings for the C program you linked (x86 Ubuntu one c

by igouy 16y ago

>>it gives you code that's faster than gcc with the options at the bottom of this page<< 1) Here are the timings for the C program you linked (x86 Ubuntu one core) - spectral-norm C GNU gcc #4 N CPU Elapsed 500 0.09 0.10 3,000 3.31 3.32 5,500 11.13 11.14 2) Here are the corresponding timings "if you tell the SBCL compiler..." spectral-norm Lisp SBCL #2 N CPU Elapsed 500 0.06 0.16 3,000 4.64 4.70 5,500 15.69 15.72 3) Is the program on the page you linked to faster or slower than the SBCL program ? http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/performance.php?test=spectralnorm http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/performance.php?test=s...

rst 16y ago
Bolla says that alioth blew it, by not asking SBCL for full optimization --- and he does in fact get different timing with the optimization in place. From the original post: N=500 gcc 0.15u 0.00s 0.17r sbcl 0.08u 0.02s 0.21r N=3000 gcc 5.60u 0.00s 5.69r sbcl 5.18u 0.01s 5.41r N=5500 gcc 18.81u 0.01s 19.12r sbcl 17.42u 0.02s 17.76r I mentioned the alioth page mainly so people could see how gcc was being run.
- igouy 16y ago
  >>Bolla says that alioth blew it, by not asking SBCL for full optimization<< No he doesn't. The spectral-norm Lisp SBCL #2 program is Lorenzo Bolla's program - look at the program source code http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/program.php?test=spectralnorm&lang=sbcl&id=2 http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/program.php?test=spect... >>he does in fact get different timing with the optimization in place<< He get's different timing but the only explanation he provides is "So, different numbers on different boxes, which is not at all unexpected."
- igouy 16y ago
  >>Bolla says that alioth blew it, by not asking SBCL for full optimization<< Maybe you should ask Lorenzo Bolla if he was trying to create misunderstanding by posting one of his old (December 5th, 2010) blog entries to HN ;-) The benchmarks game website has been showing Lorenzo Bolla's spectral-norm Lisp SBCL #2 since December 8th 2010.

by igouy 16y ago

rst 16y ago

Bolla says that alioth blew it, by not asking SBCL for full optimization --- and he does in fact get different timing with the optimization in place. From the original post: N=500 gcc 0.15u 0.00s 0.17r sbcl 0.08u 0.02s 0.21r N=3000 gcc 5.60u 0.00s 5.69r sbcl 5.18u 0.01s 5.41r N=5500 gcc 18.81u 0.01s 19.12r sbcl 17.42u 0.02s 17.76r I mentioned the alioth page mainly so people could see how gcc was being run.

igouy 16y ago
>>Bolla says that alioth blew it, by not asking SBCL for full optimization<< No he doesn't. The spectral-norm Lisp SBCL #2 program is Lorenzo Bolla's program - look at the program source code http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/program.php?test=spectralnorm&lang=sbcl&id=2 http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/program.php?test=spect... >>he does in fact get different timing with the optimization in place<< He get's different timing but the only explanation he provides is "So, different numbers on different boxes, which is not at all unexpected."
igouy 16y ago
>>Bolla says that alioth blew it, by not asking SBCL for full optimization<< Maybe you should ask Lorenzo Bolla if he was trying to create misunderstanding by posting one of his old (December 5th, 2010) blog entries to HN ;-) The benchmarks game website has been showing Lorenzo Bolla's spectral-norm Lisp SBCL #2 since December 8th 2010.