2 ms·
LuaJIT bucks the trend of slow-warmup JITs. It is extremely quick to compile and load, and its interpreter is very fast -- faster than the JIT-compiled code fr
by haberman 1y ago
LuaJIT bucks the trend of slow-warmup JITs. It is extremely quick to compile and load, and its interpreter is very fast -- faster than the JIT-compiled code from LuaJIT v1 IIRC, and certainly faster than the interpreter of Lua.
It wasn't until LuaJIT that I realized that JIT didn't inherently have to be these slow lumbering beasts that take hundreds of milliseconds just to wake from their slumber.
- gorjusborg 1y agoYet I've witnessed Lua 5.1 launching faster than luajit for some of my use cases. My point still stands though. Don't just use LuaJIT thinking it will magically make things faster in all cases. If you are embedding, LuaJIT is a no-brainer. If you are using a stand-alone interpreter, measure if you care about reality.
- NuclearPM 1y ago> If you are embedding, LuaJIT is a no-brainer. If you are using a stand-alone interpreter, measure if you care about reality. This seems backwards. Lua is easier to embed and luajit is just as easy to install standalone and has zero downsides.
- gorjusborg 1y ago> zero downsides I just said that I have measured it being slower in at least some use cases. JIT gains better when already compiled paths run repeatedly. Most long running programs embedding Lua will choose luajit for this reason. I don't care what people use, the point is that JIT compilation isn't magic that makes everything faster. The way to know is measure.