Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

chromatic (983)

chromatic
  (email not shown publicly)
http://wgz.org/chromatic/

Blog Information [technorati.com] Profile for chr0matic [technorati.com]

Journal of chromatic (983)

Tuesday January 08, 2008
04:04 PM

Some Fun Numbers

[ #35333 ]

With a production Perl 5.8.8, production Python 2.5.1, and unoptimized Parrot built for debugging from r24673, running each benchmark three times in a row to populate disk caches and the like and reporting the best numbers:

$ time perl examples/benchmarks/fib.pl
fib(28) = 317811

real 0m0.602s
user 0m0.596s
sys 0m0.004s

$ time python examples/benchmarks/fib.py
fib(28) = 317811

real 0m0.367s
user 0m0.364s
sys 0m0.004s

$ time parrot examples/benchmarks/fib.pir
fib(28) = 317811 1.949330s

real 0m1.965s
user 0m1.960s
sys 0m0.004s

That's not great for Parrot, but it's a debugging build without optimizations. However, there are some optimizations built in and enabled with special command-line flags:

$ time parrot -Cj -O3 examples/benchmarks/fib.pir
fib(28) = 317811 0.007451s

real 0m0.023s
user 0m0.016s
sys 0m0.004s

That's better. Again, this is with a debugging build. With an optimized, non-debugging build (that is, no debugging symbols, no assertions, and GCC's -O2 $ time parrot examples/benchmarks/fib.pir
fib(28) = 317811 1.156776s

real 0m1.170s
user 0m1.164s
sys 0m0.000s

That's better. Now the punchline:

$ time parrot -Cj -O3 examples/benchmarks/fib.pir
fib(28) = 317811 0.007305s

real 0m0.020s
user 0m0.012s
sys 0m0.004s

Of course, it's important not to get too cocky. There are languages specifically optimized for generating the Fibonacci sequence:

$ time ./haskell_fib
"fib(28) = 317811"

real 0m0.003s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.004s

Still, for a development version of Parrot that's not bad.

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I think it's important to note that the PIR example represents something of a lower bound for languages targeting Parrot.

    The PIR code is designed to be fast and is most likely simpler than the generated code will be from any HLL compiler (and it doesn't need to load any whole language runtimes). So while I hope that Perl-6-on-Parrot will generate such fast code, in all likelihood I think it'll be a fair bit slower than that.

    It's a good thing that the PIR is that fast, but I don't think it's much of a metric
    • That's a fair point, but it's also important to note that it's possible to write efficient and cross-platform PIR by hand to use from any HLL in case you need additional speed. Compare that to dropping down to C (and then trying to distribute that C across multiple platforms).

      Even if Perl 6 on Parrot is an order of magnitude slower than PIR on Parrot, it's still faster than Perl 5 on C.

  • Ok, I won't complain anymore ... but wait, what about der perl6 binary?
  • With ...

    $ time parrot -Cj -O3 examples/benchmarks/fib.pir
    fib(28) = 317811 0.007305s

    ... you are just measuring parrot startup time, which isn't optimized in any way.

    Please try something real ;-) like fib 38.

    $ time ./parrot -Cj -O3 examples/benchmarks/fib.pir 38
    fib(38) = 39088169 0.671501s

    (on my ancient 2GHz Athlon). Wirh perl 5.8.8 it's consuming some time:

    $ time perl examples/benchmarks/fib.pl 38
    fib(38) = 39088169

    real    2m3.206s

    which is exactly what I've always said: compiler t