Without a LargeIntegers plugin, this test is way too slow, it times out. Even in Cog it takes almost 1 minute:
"disable LargeIntegers plugin" CompiledMethod allInstancesDo: [:cm | (cm primitive = 117 and: [(cm literalAt: 1) first = #LargeIntegers]) ifTrue: [(cm literalAt: 1) at: 1 put: #LargeIntegersDisabled]]. Smalltalk unloadModule: #LargeIntegers. "run test" IntegerTest run: #testRaisedToModulo. "enable LargeIntegers plugin" CompiledMethod allInstancesDo: [:cm | (cm primitive = 117 and: [(cm literalAt: 1) first = #LargeIntegersDisabled]) ifTrue: [(cm literalAt: 1) at: 1 put: #LargeIntegers]]. Smalltalk unloadModule: #LargeIntegersDisabled. - Bert - smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment |
It's reasonnably 259ms here with a homebrew cog (accelerated 32bits large int), core i7, win7... 27770ms with disabled plugin (default time out is set to 5000ms I think) Should we test if #LargeIntegers module is loaded in preamble?2014-07-24 16:03 GMT+02:00 Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>: Without a LargeIntegers plugin, this test is way too slow, it times out. Even in Cog it takes almost 1 minute: |
On 24.07.2014, at 19:32, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
Is it really necessary to run 2500 iterations? Wouldn't 5 or so be enough? - Bert -
smime.p7s (5K) Download Attachment |
Bert, I don't remember if it was really necessary (it was probably useful during development, now it's questionnable). See if last inbox commit fits...
2014-07-24 20:04 GMT+02:00 Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>:
|
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |