[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Fri, 03 Dec 2010 17:29:55 -0500
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)
>> You mean the performance overhead from adding an extra internal_catch?
>> I doubt there's a free lunch here; adding a "return" or "return-from"
>> mechanism would also add overhead, and that overhead would apply to
>> every single funcall. Still, it's a worthwhile experiment to implement
>> "return"/"return-from" and see how big the performance impact is.
> I did a quick experiment, and turns out built-in blocking is a little
> faster than an explicit `catch', mostly because of reduced consing. I
> tested with a function that runs 500,000 tight `while' loops:
> (defun test-loop-with-catch ()
> (dotimes (ii 500000)
> (let ((ll '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10)))
> (catch 'exit
> (while ll (setq ll (cdr ll)))))))
> The run time is 1.164s, as opposed to 1.084s with the `catch' omitted.
> So an explicit `catch' adds about 10 percent to the run time.
> If I hack Fwhile to perform a catch internally, the runtime for the test
> function (with the `catch' omitted) is 1.057s, within the margin of
> error of the unhacked Emacs.
A few questions:
- how do you explain that Fwhile with internal catch is faster (1.057 <
1.084) than without an internal catch? Or is that what you mean by
"within the margin of error"?
- You seem to be measuring time for the interpreted code, is that right?
If so, I think it would be more interesting to measure the time for
The little tests I've performed seem to indicate that for interpreted
code the extra `catch' doesn't make much of a difference, but for the
compiled version of your test, the difference is around 20%.
> This (very limited) test indicates that adding built-in support for
> block, return, and return-from should have little performance impact.
> (Though the block tags ought to use a specialized obarray instead of
> what cl-macs.el does, which is to intern them as "--cl-block-%s--".)
If we add support for C-like exit statements (break/return, that only
work locally and hence don't add any extra run-time cost) to the
byte-compiler, that would be nice.