[Vm-dev] how slower is called a named primitive over a numbered
estebanlm at gmail.com
Mon Jun 22 17:32:58 UTC 2015
I’m just trying to understand the cost difference between prim 120 and #primitiveCalloutWithArgs so it should be easy to set up a test :)
but… judging #primitiveDoNamedPrimitiveWithArgs… I suppose something like Athens will need a numbered primitive, in order to keep it performant…
but well, after I have numbers I will send a proposition (if needed), to remap #primitiveCalloutWithArgs into a number… :P
> On 22 Jun 2015, at 19:16, Clément Bera <bera.clement at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well it also depends if the primitive is generated by the JIT. If you rewrite SmallInteger>>#+ from primitive 1 to a named primitive the overhead will be more important than just the searching/loading/linking because the JIT won't compile it to n-code anymore.
> So make a test with a primitive not compiled by the JIT.
> 2015-06-22 18:35 GMT+02:00 David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com <mailto:lewis at mail.msen.com>>:
> That sounds right to me too. But it would be a worthwhile experiment to
> set up a test to confirm it. Maybe take one or more methods that call
> numbered primitives, and recode them to call the primitives by name. Then
> measure and see if anything got slower.
> > On 22-06-2015, at 5:13 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> Any idea how slower is? I mean, any measure/estimation/something around?
> > After the initial searching/loading/linking it should be pretty much
> > identical. It’s just a jump to a pointed-at program location.
> > tim
> > --
> > tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org <mailto:tim at rowledge.org>; http://www.rowledge.org/tim <http://www.rowledge.org/tim>
> > Useful random insult:- Ready to check in at the HaHa Hilton.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Vm-dev