You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As we add nonlocal compiler optimizations (including e.g. deforestation, #77 ), we need some way to track that the optimizations are actually making a difference. Since these are nonlocal optimizations and not related to any specific form (alone), it would be nice to expand the suite of competitive benchmarks in profile/competitive.rkt that compare performance against Racket.
This way, we would see both progress against Qi's own past performance, but also gains against Racket. It'd be nice to even beat Racket performance once in a while 😉 . Given that we are able to assume "no accidental side-effects", which Racket cannot, this seems achievable.
Examples of benchmarks we could add include:
those involving functional data transformations (map, filter and fold)
(collect more here)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As we add nonlocal compiler optimizations (including e.g. deforestation, #77 ), we need some way to track that the optimizations are actually making a difference. Since these are nonlocal optimizations and not related to any specific form (alone), it would be nice to expand the suite of competitive benchmarks in profile/competitive.rkt that compare performance against Racket.
This way, we would see both progress against Qi's own past performance, but also gains against Racket. It'd be nice to even beat Racket performance once in a while 😉 . Given that we are able to assume "no accidental side-effects", which Racket cannot, this seems achievable.
Examples of benchmarks we could add include:
map
,filter
andfold
)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: