From: Anthony Berglas
Subject: Re: AKCL vs Fortran vs ML time test
Date: 
Message-ID: <35t61h$ret@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
In <··········@coils.cims.nyu.edu> ········@coils.cims.nyu.edu (Mark McConnell) writes:

>I have been doing some timing tests to compare various languages, and
>I thought people would like to see the results.

Excellent.

I have found CMUCL to be very efficient on Suns.  I wrote a neural net
benchmark in lisp and gcc, and they ran in almost the same time.
(Details were posted earlier).  (The new version 17 is much beter than
the previous one.)

I am concerned that any of the tests, especially the CMUCL one, do ANY
garbage collection whatsoever on numeric code like this.  My neural
net benchmark did not, and I wonder what is happening.

Note that CMUCL has an advantage of AKCL in not using C, which means
that it can utilize the Sparcks 30 bit fixnum arithmetic with 2 tag
bits. 

Also, a good way to make CMUCL fast is to include declaraions that
tell it that a group of functions are to be compiled as a unit, I
forget how its done.

Anthony
--
Anthony Berglas
Rm 312a, Computer Science, Uni of Qld, 4072, Australia.
Uni Ph +61 7 365 4184,  Home 391 7727,  Fax 365 1999