Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak VM

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: Float oddities

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

1 message

David T. Lewis

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: Float oddities

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 05:51:33PM -0400, Bob Arning wrote:

> I thought I'd extend the test to an older squeak&vm
>
> ---interpreter vm (3.8.12) squeak 3.2 ---------
> Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1.0 ==> 496
> Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1.0 ==> 761
> Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1 ==> 225
> Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1 ==> 494
> ---interpreter vm (5.7.4.1) squeak 4.5 ---------
> Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1.0 ==> 719
> Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1.0 ==> 991
> Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1 ==> 312
> Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1 ==> 686
>
> The old one wins.
>
> Cheers,
> Bob

(CC to vm-dev list)

I get different results on my Linux PC.

- Squeak 3.2 with interpreter VM compiled by Ian, circa 2006:

Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1.0 ==> 1041
Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1.0 ==> 1432
Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1 ==> 390
Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1 ==> 1108

- Squeak 4.4 with Ian's 4.4.7-2357 VM, circa 2012:

Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1.0 ==> 840
Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1.0 ==> 1176
Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1 ==> 420
Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1 ==> 836

- Squeak 4.4 with my locally compiled 4.12.6.2787 VM (because I cannot use
Ian's 4.10.2.2614 from squeakvm.org due to a Linux glib compatibility
problem for the outdated Linux on my PC):

Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1.0 ==> 782
Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1.0 ==> 1077
Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1 ==> 461
Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1 ==> 789

Perhaps there are other factors on the Mac platform (compiler changes,
etc) that are affecting the performance. Could you try Squeak 4.4 with
Ian's unix Mac VM from squeakvm.org and see if you get different results?

http://squeakvm.org/unix/release/Squeak-4.10.2.2614-darwin10.8.0_i386.tar.gz

Dave

> On 9/27/13 2:12 PM, Bob Arning wrote:
> >Following up Herbert's question, I wrote:
> >
> >compareTiming: a to: b
> >"
> >---interpreter vm (5.7.4.1) ---------
> >Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1.0 ==> 719
> >Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1.0 ==> 991
> >Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1 ==> 312
> >Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1 ==> 686
> >---cog vm (2749)---------
> >*Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1.0 ==> 28162*
> >Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1.0 ==> 148
> >Float compareTiming: 1 to: 1 ==> 97
> >Float compareTiming: 1.0 to: 1 ==> 179
> >"
> >
> >^[1000000 timesRepeat: [
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> > a < b.
> >]] timeToRun
> >
> >So, some obvious questions:
> >- in the interpreter vm, why is comparing two floats slower that an
> >integer and a float?
> >- what's up with Cog? Three tests are faster by the expected ratio and
> >one took a real dive.
> >
> >Also, the profiler Herbert used could use some attention to the
> >NewFloat printing:
> >
> >99.9 (898,069) Multiline1 doOneStep:
> >*77.30000000000001* (694,902) Multiline1 [HkTestLine] doTests:
> > 73.8 (663,438) HkRunin [HkTestStation] canStartNextTest:
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Bob
> >
>