Skip to content

Conversation

@alex
Copy link
Member

@alex alex commented Aug 4, 2014

...free

@alex
Copy link
Member Author

alex commented Aug 4, 2014

Notably missing is any sort of cap on how many times it will unroll (can add later)

@alex
Copy link
Member Author

alex commented Aug 4, 2014

Also:

i = 0
while i < 10000000
  i += [0, 1].reduce(:+)
end

doesn't actually seem to be any faster than before this. So in conclusion, wat :/ (Good news: looking at the trace, it looks like maybe at least something got unrolled)

@timfel
Copy link
Member

timfel commented Aug 6, 2014

So, I think this looks good, although it's strange that it doesn't actually speed things up. For the pixels benchmark, do you think we should refactor to use the rlib ordered dict instead of rolling our own?

@alex
Copy link
Member Author

alex commented Aug 6, 2014

That would probably be a good idea. I also think I should split this patch
into the 2 parts; the bool refactor and the unrolling.

On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Tim Felgentreff notifications@github.com
wrote:

So, I think this looks good, although it's strange that it doesn't
actually speed things up. For the pixels benchmark, do you think we should
refactor to use the rlib ordered dict instead of rolling our own?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#836 (comment).

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
"The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
GPG Key fingerprint: 125F 5C67 DFE9 4084

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants