Where to next with Exupery?

Bryce Kampjes bryce at kampjes.demon.co.uk
Sat May 14 19:39:29 UTC 2005

news.gmane.org writes:
 > Hi Bryce
 >  > Optimising floating point with primitive inlining would be
 > > possible, without it is much harder because the interpreter favours
 > > integer performance.
 > It would be good if floats were on an equal footing to integers. Im in 
 > no position to push for it, because our (comercial) app is on a 
 > different Smalltalk (even if we are looking at Squeak as a possible 
 > alternative)

>From where I'm standing you're in a better position to push for it
because you are considering using Squeak for commercial purposes. If
you weren't using Smalltalk, that would be better still (growing the

To get a decent improvement for Floats I'd have to remove the boxing
and unboxing of values. That requires a better optimisation framework
than I currently have. I can build the framework for integers then add
floats once there is decent chance of optimising them. It's something
I'm thinking about now, but will not start now. Inlined primitives are
a necessary part of the missing framework and they are next.

 > Im probably going to flamed for this, but in you are looking for 
 > benchmarks, there all always the dubious benchmarks in the great 
 > language shoot out site.

It's a source for benchmarks, I could also borrow them from other
places. But what I'm interested in is benchmarks with a practical
benefit to the Squeak community.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list