Thue-Morse and performance: Squeak v.s. Strongtalk v.s.
Klaus D. Witzel
klaus.witzel at cobss.com
Sun Dec 17 15:32:36 UTC 2006
on Sun, 17 Dec 2006 15:58:12 +0100, you wrote:
> Hi Klaus,
> On 12/17/06, Klaus D. Witzel <klaus.witzel at cobss.com> wrote:
>> > I can always design you a benchmark that makes a particular system
>> > bad.
>> C'mon. It's either faster or it's not. No way out.
> exactly, you're absolutely right there.
> The question is which conclusions you draw from such a punctual
Right you are, and so is Andreas.
> And the conclusion you initially drew - something along
> the lines of "I thought Strongtalk was the fastest Smalltalk, whoops,
> that's not true" - is far too general in the limited light your
> particular measurement sheds on Strongtalk performance.
Yes, I can now see that my "and now it shows to be in almost the same
class as Squeak is" is understood as a strong claim. But it just expresses
my disappointment and desillusion.
> I guess this is what it boils down to. Judging an entire system's
> performance by just one small simple point of observation just doesn't
> work. (I must admit that this started me in the first place.)
No (agreeing with your "just doesn't work"). But the message is clear
(reflecting Andreas' point): if you have nothing to inline (etc), then
PICs (which can run out of steam) won't help.
No misunderstanding, my point did not change: even if so (have nothing to
inline), *faster than all others* is "fast even beyond PICs capabilities".
Otherwise it can be contradicted by Andreas (... can always design you a
benchmark that makes a particular system look bad... :)
Perhaps there is something to learn from VW (without compromising the
existing, I mean). Who knows.
From a pragmatic point of view, if you can't write inlineable (type
feedback'able, etc) code (or, as Andreas pointed out: can't write such a
test :) , whatever the reason, don't expect a guarantee for superior
More information about the Squeak-dev