Hi Chris,

If the tests are passing (ignoring those that rely on GraphViz) then it's working.

ExuperyBenchmarks new run

Which on my machine produces the following output on the transcript:

arithmaticLoopBenchmark 1395 compiled 91 ratio: 15.330 bytecodeBenchmark 2132 compiled 456 ratio: 4.675 sendBenchmark 1588 compiled 684 ratio: 2.322 doLoopsBenchmark 1086 compiled 649 ratio: 1.673 largeExplorers 337 compiled 366 ratio: 0.921 compilerBenchmark 794 compiled 767 ratio: 1.035 Cumulative Time 4241.294 compiled 1389.046 ratio 3.053

Only the latest versions from SqueakSource will show an improvement for the compilerBenchmark. The current release is trying to provide an improvment for both the compiler benchmark and the largeExplorers benchmark. Both are using profile driven compilation. compilerBenchmark is only spending 5% of it's time in native code and native code support routines. Only 1.9% is actually in native code. There's room to improve both by tuning the support code and by improving the profiler.

Will run the benchmark suite. That should give you an idea about how Exupery is performing.

The problem you encountered was you need to tell Exupery to compile methods, it does not compile automatically yet. This is to make it easier to debug.

In the latest development builds try something like:

ExuperyProfiler optimise: [ExuperyBenchmarks new compilerBenchmark]. ExuperyBenchmarks new compilerBenchmark Exupery dynamicallyInline.

Which is what the last two benchmarks call. #optimise: profiles the block then compiles the most promising methods. #dynamicallyInline reads the polymorphic inline caches then dynamically inlines and compiles any primitives that were called (and Exupery knows how to compile).

Exupery compileMethod: #benchmark class: SmallInteger inlining: {{43. Array}. {62. Array}}. Exupery compileMethod: #benchFib class: SmallInteger.

Will manually compile the methods used by the bytecode benchmark. Exupery compiles a version of each method for each individual receiver. David calls this method copy-down. At the moment, except for the #at: and #at:put: primitives which are specialised for each receiver it's probably not providing much value in Exupery.

Bryce