Re: [xmlvm-users] One small XMLVM benchmark

[Steve H. <st...@we...>]

Just a small update.  As it turns out, my first benchmark was flawed
because it allowed GCC/LLVM to optimize it more than was fair.  After
revising the algorithm to force GCC/LLVM to play by the rules I found that
Avian edged out XMLVM by about 15% in speed.  They were both slower than
the native C implementation by a factor of about 2.

This doesn't change, at all, my overall impression that XMLVM is quite fast
and that the potential is very far reaching.

I wrote about the revised benchmarks on my blog at
http://sjhannah.com/blog/?p=226

Keep up the great work!

-Steve

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Paul Poley <bay...@gm...> wrote:

> Interesting news.  Nice write up!
>
> Paul
>
> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Steve Hannah <st...@we...> wrote:
>
>> I just wanted to drop a line into this list to thank you guys for your
>> work.  I have been playing around with CodenameOne recently to try to build
>> a port that runs on Avian (an AOT java compiler) because I had a hunch that
>> it would be faster than the code produced by XMLVM (which is their default
>> solution for iOS).
>>
>> I was wrong.  Running a simple test on the Towers of Hanoi problem on an
>> app that was built separately using XMLVM and Avian I found that the XMLVM
>> build was actually slightly faster than the Avian AOT compiled binary.
>>
>> I wrote about my experiment in my blog at http://sjhannah.com/blog/?p=225
>>
>> Anyways.  Incredible work.  The potential of this project is quite
>> far-reaching.
>>
>> -Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel:
>> BUILD Helping you discover the best ways to construct your parallel
>> projects.
>> http://goparallel.sourceforge.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> xmlvm-users mailing list
>> xml...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xmlvm-users
>>
>>
>


-- 
Steve Hannah
Web Lite Solutions Corp.