Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>> "Dan" == Dan Gildea <dgildea at users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> Dan> It looks like, using cmucl 20c, the following commit
> Dan> makes cmucl take 442 seconds to execute the test suite,
> Dan> whereas previously it took 125 seconds.
>
> Dan> Not sure why - other lisps do not seem to be affected.
>
> Dan> commit be0490a52b07153228dd19f5bb8145b035f1b188
> Dan> Author: Rupert Swarbrick <rswarbrick at gmail.com>
> Dan> Date: Fri Sep 27 00:48:56 2013 +0100
>
> Ouch! FWIW, I can confirm this slowdown using cmucl 20e. The test
> suite takes 134 sec on commit cf77b9e, which is version before the
> above commit.
>
> Ray
Eek, I'm terribly sorry: I did do performance tests on sbcl and gcl (I
think), but didn't check with cmucl.
I'll revert the change this evening: a performance regression even in a
single lisp isn't really ok. A pity, because the whole point was to try
to make some of the rat code a bit easier to reason about.
Ray: Have you any idea what makes cmucl extra slow here? I think I
prefer the semantics of the newer code, so maybe you can suggest a way
to do something similar without triggering whatever I hit?
Rupert
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 315 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.math.utexas.edu/pipermail/maxima/attachments/20131023/7d0fc5b8/attachment.pgp>;