[armedbear-devel] (lisp) Stack management efficiency

Erik Huelsmann ehuels at gmail.com
Tue Jul 21 11:23:04 UTC 2009

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Ville
Voutilainen<ville.voutilainen at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Erik Huelsmann<ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:
>> When running this code, it takes around 1440 seconds on my PC. Then I
>> modified the stack management routine to re-use available stack frames
>> (and conses), instead of creating new ones on every call. This took
>> execution time down to around 1240 seconds. A good improvement, I'd
>> say.
>> However, with the change described above, stack frames won't ever
>> become garbage anymore. My question is: does the loss of GC-ability
>> outweigh the performance gain?
> How many frames will then hang around? If I make a deep call, and never
> do another deep call, will I then have frames lurking around from the deep
> call?

In the current implementation: yes. However, with this improvement,
there's probably some room for keeping a very small statistic of some
kind which would allow building a shorter list of stack frames (ie
dispose of all / a few). Ofcourse, that would undo some of the
performance gain.

Do you have ideas? I thought to use a weak reference, meaning GC will
collect the memory if it needs it, but other than that, I certainly
think setting an upperbound won't fix the "keep hanging around" issue.

Oh; there's a single case where they get cleared up in my current
implementation even: when the thread gets destroyed. For separate task
threads that means relatively soon, for the main thread that would
equal to 'never'.



More information about the armedbear-devel mailing list