Exupery's new mailing list

Matej Košík kosik at fiit.stuba.sk
Tue Nov 1 10:54:44 UTC 2005

Hash: SHA1

Bryce Kampjes wrote:
> Exupery, a bytecode to machine code compiler (a JIT) for Squeak, now
> has it's own mailing list. Join if you're interested in either helping
> develop or using Exupery. Exupery is currently 15% faster than
> VisualWorks for the bytecode benchmark and twice as fast as Squeak's
> interpreter for the send benchmark.
> Exupery's next goal is to become seriously useful. So join even if
> you're interested in using a beta compiler rather than writing a
> compiler. Some user domain expertise would be helpful. I know
> very little about graphics, multimedia, Morphic, or crypto which
> are all things that might benefit from a little more speed. 
> The list is here:
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/exupery
> Bryce


I tried to subscribe to the list above. I've got this error message:
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
Bug in Mailman version 2.1.5

We're sorry, we hit a bug!

Please inform the webmaster for this site of this problem. Printing of
traceback and other system information has been explicitly inhibited, 	
but the webmaster can find this information in the Mailman error logs.
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
there obviously is (was) some problem.

Since I do use Linux, I thought I'll give your VM a try, I have heard of
Exupery before, so according to
I downloaded appropriate tarball, I've copied an ordinary 3.8-6665
image, changes and sources nearby and run it as normal:

	cd build && ./squeak *ge

Loading Exupery package from SqueakMap caused no problems (none errors,
none warnings, nothing). After loading process finished, I ran your tests.


No, problems there:

	227 run, 227 passes, 0 expected failures, 0 failures, 0 errors,
	0 unexpected passes, 2min

So I decided to do what you propose on the swiki Exupery page, so these
are benchmarks (?) before compiling some methods

	Exupery initialiseExupery
	ExuperyBenchmarks new run explore
	0 tinyBenchmarks
	10000 benchmark

Here are the result of the above command:

'111401218 bytecodes/sec; 4189054 sends/sec'

OK, I thought now I am going to compile the suggested methods and see
the performance improvement. So here's what I did

	Exupery compileMethod: #benchmark class: Integer
	Exupery compileMethod: #at: class: Array
	Exupery compileMethod: #at:put: class: Array

And running the same bencharks as above, i.e.

	ExuperyBenchmarks new run explore
	0 tinyBenchmarks
	10000 benchmark

and here are the results:

'109777015 bytecodes/sec; 4098416 sends/sec'

My naive eyes (I really do not know precisely what I am really doing) do
not see any performance enhancement. What did I forget to do? Did I look
on the right things?

Wishing the best...
- --
Matej Košík
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list