[armedbear-devel] Significant increase in build time

[Blake McBride]

That's helpful.  Thanks.  So now we need to do benchmark / runtime tests.

Thanks.

Blake

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:
> Blake,
>
>
> Before going to bed, I did a quick test - as discussed over GMail chat
> - to see how much they differ in compilation times on other software.
>
> timing new code, Maxima compilation: 223.416s, loading: 25.8
> timing old code, Maxima compilation: 204.063s, loading: 29.174
>
> I have no idea of the variation of the Maxima compilation times; it
> looks like the new code is 10% slower at compiling, but 20% more
> efficient at loading. However, these were single runs, so my
> conclusions may be way off, depending on the variations.
>
>
> Bye,
>
> Erik.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Blake McBride <blake at mcbride.name> wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I hadn't built ABCL in a little while so I checked out the latest
>> version today and built it.  It seemed to be significantly slower than
>> before so I decided to investigate.  This is what I found.
>>
>> In the past I could build ABCL in 2:43.  It now takes me 4:40.  That
>> (IMO) represents a pretty significant change in build time.  I did a
>> binary search and discovered that all of the change occurred at
>> revision 12918 - Generic Class File Branch Merge.
>>
>> In general, I could't care less about the build time unless it is
>> indicative of a problem that could rear its head in my application.
>> Where is that time being spent?  Is there a change in runtime?
>> Loading? Compiling?
>>
>> I'd be real interested in this.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Blake McBride
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> armedbear-devel mailing list
>> armedbear-devel at common-lisp.net
>> http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/armedbear-devel
>>
>