On Wed, 5 Sep 2018 at 10:44, Craig Latta <craig at blackpagedigital.com> wrote:

>
>      Oops, here's a more clearly-worded version...
>
>      It's convenient to run JS code on the fly from within SqueakJS via
> Web Workers. So let's run some benchmarks. :) The test: What's the
> highest Fibonacci number you can calculate in one second? Each result is
> that number, and then how much faster other systems are. "JS" refers to
> JS code running in a Web Worker forked by SqueakJS, "ST" refers to
> running the test in Smalltalk in SqueakJS.
>
>      laptop native Cog on macOS: 40 (baseline)
>      laptop Chrome JS: 34 (laptop native Cog on macOS is 17x faster)
>      mobile Safari JS: 33 (laptop Chrome JS is 1.5x faster)
>      laptop Chrome ST: 29 (laptop Chrome JS is 12x faster,
>                            mobile Safari JS is 8x faster)
>      mobile Safari ST: 24 (mobile Safari JS is 22x faster,
>                            laptop Chrome ST is 3x faster)



Cool!

What's the overhead of the WebWorkers? I mean compared to just running the
JS code from SqueakJS:

JS at: 'fib' put: (JS Function new: 'n' with: 'return n <= 1 ? n : fib(n-1)
+ fib(n-2)').
JS fib: 38
==> 39088169

- Bert -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20180905/d9cd9b6e/attachment.html>