6 ms·

Are your graphs up to date ? Seems just an hour ago [1]: > Rust: build with --release. 10X performance boost! That might mean that Rust would top the charts

Are your graphs up to date ? Seems just an hour ago [1]: > Rust: build with --release. 10X performance boost! That might mean that Rust would top the charts instead of Nim. [1]: https://github.com/kanaka/mal/commit/434516e0d172904e06b05f6dee83ce2e7859b950 https://github.com/kanaka/mal/commit/434516e0d172904e06b05f6...

def- 12y ago
Yes, I updated it already.
- e12e 12y ago
  Is the lua implementation very new and/or incomplete? It seems to be missing from the benchmarks, and if it's lua 5.1, maybe it'll work with luajit? [ed: Also interesting to note that the clojure version is much slower than scala/java. If nothing else, I guess it's an indication of performance gains that can be had by implementing parts of a clojure program in java (unless there's something off with the clojure implementation, of course.]
  - def- 12y ago
    I have no idea, I didn't run the benchmarks. I only have a few of these languages on my system.
  - kanaka 12y ago
    I'm rather hesitant to post any sort of benchmarks (since the existing ones suck so bad), but the using these, the lua 5.1.5 equivalents would be: 1, 1, 293 Lua does seem to be an odd one in that the short tests run quickly but this does not translate into iterations for the longer 10 second test. Perhaps the mal implementation is triggering bad GC behavior or something and that drags down the longer running tests. That's just speculation though. Again, please take the numbers with a mountain size grain of salt.
pcwalton 12y ago
Just one glance at the Rust version (e.g. [1]) shows a lot of needless allocation. For example: if *strn == "&".to_string() { ... } is a very slow (and verbose) way to write if &strn[..] == "&" { ... } and rr_string("'".to_string() + k.to_string() + "' not found".to_string()) is a very slow (and verbose) way to write rr_string(format!("'{}' not found", k))` Etc. etc. [1]: https://github.com/kanaka/mal/blob/master/rust/src/env.rs https://github.com/kanaka/mal/blob/master/rust/src/env.rs
- steveklabnik 12y ago
  It's also using some manual clone instead of Cargo overrides, and manually running rather than `cargo run`... time for some PRs, I guess! EDIT: further, looks like it's on a really old Rust: https://github.com/kanaka/rust-pcre https://github.com/kanaka/rust-pcre wasn't updated since October... EDIT 2: I tried to update the code, but it's really, really out of date, and will be a ton of work. So I've just submitted https://github.com/kanaka/mal/pull/23 https://github.com/kanaka/mal/pull/23 instead. :(
  - kanaka 12y ago
    Well, I'm not going to remove it. But I will see if I can find some time to improve it in the next few days. I've been meaning to cycle back around. Of course, fixes from somebody who's actually a Rust expert would have been preferred :-) The reason it still uses the alternate pcre is because this still hasn't been fixed: https://github.com/rust-lang/regex/issues/28 https://github.com/rust-lang/regex/issues/28 I would love to get rid of that nastiness.
    - steveklabnik 12y ago
      That's a bummer, because until then, you'll be strongly mis-representing Rust :/
      - kanaka 12y ago
        I'm quite happy to take PRs from an expert to address the issues and represent Rust better. :-) UPDATE: I will point out that the README is pretty clear that this is rust 0.13. Doesn't mean it's a good representation of rust 0.13 either of course, but it clearly isn't based on a recent version of Rust.
Dewie 12y ago
It's weird that people that make benchmarks don't investigate which flags to pass for getting the most optimized build. Many compilers don't do max optimization by default. In particular, people making benchmarks with rust code seem to tend to forget or be unaware of the `release` flag.
- pcwalton 12y ago
  Yeah, this is happening again and again in Rust: people publish Rust benchmarks without optimization on. In fact, we just decided this week to change "Compiling" to "Compiling (Debug)" in Cargo if optimization isn't turned on to address this problem. It's sad :(
  - pjmlp 12y ago
    If it helps it doesn't happen only to Rust but to all languages. There is this misunderstanding between implementations and languages where people equate whatever they have installed on their computer with all implementations of the said language. Also not knowing about profilers and optimization flags. So yeah, it is sad.
- omaranto 12y ago
  That's probably because there is no --release flag: $ rustc --release prog.rs error: Unrecognized option: 'release'. There is a -O for optimization, it is equivalent to -C opt-level=2. EDIT: Oh, cargo build does have a --release which seems to be equivalent to -C opt-level=3, which I guess is even better.
  - steveklabnik 12y ago
    `cargo build --release` does more than just `-C opt-level=3`, actually. For example a regular `cargo build` also adds `-g`, and that's removed for `--release`.
- rdtsc 12y ago
  Maybe the release flag should be the default?

def- 12y ago

Yes, I updated it already.

e12e 12y ago
Is the lua implementation very new and/or incomplete? It seems to be missing from the benchmarks, and if it's lua 5.1, maybe it'll work with luajit? [ed: Also interesting to note that the clojure version is much slower than scala/java. If nothing else, I guess it's an indication of performance gains that can be had by implementing parts of a clojure program in java (unless there's something off with the clojure implementation, of course.]
- def- 12y ago
  I have no idea, I didn't run the benchmarks. I only have a few of these languages on my system.
- kanaka 12y ago
  I'm rather hesitant to post any sort of benchmarks (since the existing ones suck so bad), but the using these, the lua 5.1.5 equivalents would be: 1, 1, 293 Lua does seem to be an odd one in that the short tests run quickly but this does not translate into iterations for the longer 10 second test. Perhaps the mal implementation is triggering bad GC behavior or something and that drags down the longer running tests. That's just speculation though. Again, please take the numbers with a mountain size grain of salt.

pcwalton 12y ago

Just one glance at the Rust version (e.g. [1]) shows a lot of needless allocation. For example: if *strn == "&".to_string() { ... } is a very slow (and verbose) way to write if &strn[..] == "&" { ... } and rr_string("'".to_string() + k.to_string() + "' not found".to_string()) is a very slow (and verbose) way to write rr_string(format!("'{}' not found", k))` Etc. etc. [1]: https://github.com/kanaka/mal/blob/master/rust/src/env.rs https://github.com/kanaka/mal/blob/master/rust/src/env.rs

steveklabnik 12y ago
It's also using some manual clone instead of Cargo overrides, and manually running rather than `cargo run`... time for some PRs, I guess! EDIT: further, looks like it's on a really old Rust: https://github.com/kanaka/rust-pcre https://github.com/kanaka/rust-pcre wasn't updated since October... EDIT 2: I tried to update the code, but it's really, really out of date, and will be a ton of work. So I've just submitted https://github.com/kanaka/mal/pull/23 https://github.com/kanaka/mal/pull/23 instead. :(
- kanaka 12y ago
  Well, I'm not going to remove it. But I will see if I can find some time to improve it in the next few days. I've been meaning to cycle back around. Of course, fixes from somebody who's actually a Rust expert would have been preferred :-) The reason it still uses the alternate pcre is because this still hasn't been fixed: https://github.com/rust-lang/regex/issues/28 https://github.com/rust-lang/regex/issues/28 I would love to get rid of that nastiness.
  - steveklabnik 12y ago
    That's a bummer, because until then, you'll be strongly mis-representing Rust :/
    - kanaka 12y ago
      I'm quite happy to take PRs from an expert to address the issues and represent Rust better. :-) UPDATE: I will point out that the README is pretty clear that this is rust 0.13. Doesn't mean it's a good representation of rust 0.13 either of course, but it clearly isn't based on a recent version of Rust.

Dewie 12y ago

It's weird that people that make benchmarks don't investigate which flags to pass for getting the most optimized build. Many compilers don't do max optimization by default. In particular, people making benchmarks with rust code seem to tend to forget or be unaware of the `release` flag.

pcwalton 12y ago
Yeah, this is happening again and again in Rust: people publish Rust benchmarks without optimization on. In fact, we just decided this week to change "Compiling" to "Compiling (Debug)" in Cargo if optimization isn't turned on to address this problem. It's sad :(
- pjmlp 12y ago
  If it helps it doesn't happen only to Rust but to all languages. There is this misunderstanding between implementations and languages where people equate whatever they have installed on their computer with all implementations of the said language. Also not knowing about profilers and optimization flags. So yeah, it is sad.
omaranto 12y ago
That's probably because there is no --release flag: $ rustc --release prog.rs error: Unrecognized option: 'release'. There is a -O for optimization, it is equivalent to -C opt-level=2. EDIT: Oh, cargo build does have a --release which seems to be equivalent to -C opt-level=3, which I guess is even better.
- steveklabnik 12y ago
  `cargo build --release` does more than just `-C opt-level=3`, actually. For example a regular `cargo build` also adds `-g`, and that's removed for `--release`.
rdtsc 12y ago
Maybe the release flag should be the default?