Browse thread
[Caml-list] matrix-matrix multiply - O'Caml is 6 times slower than C
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Christophe TROESTLER <debian00@t...> |
| Subject: | [Caml-list] Re: float boxing (was: matrix-matrix multiply) |
On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, Issac Trotts <ijtrotts@ucdavis.edu> wrote:
>
> You might try converting your references to mutable fields.
>
> let x = ref 1.0 in
> let n = int_of_string Sys.argv.(1) in
> for i = 1 to n do x := !x +. 1.0 done
>
> ./ref 100000000 2.51s user 0.00s system 99% cpu 2.515 total
>
> type t = { mutable f:float };;
> let x = { f = 1.0 } in
> let n = int_of_string Sys.argv.(1) in
> for i = 1 to n do x.f <- x.f +. 1.0 done
>
> ./ref2 100000000 1.54s user 0.01s system 100% cpu 1.542 total
A few questions in view of this. First, on my machine (AMD Athlon
1GHz running GNU/Linux), the timings give a preference to ref.ml
time ./ref 100000000
real 0m1.279s user 0m1.280s sys 0m0.000s
time ./ref2 100000000
real 0m1.411s user 0m1.380s sys 0m0.000s
What could be a reason for that?
Second, ain't references be optimized when their type is statically
known to be a float ref (I thought so, please confirm or correct)?
It seems to me there are three main issues concerning floats:
* storing (avoid unnecessary indirections but take care of GC)
* comparisons (= is not reflexive in IEEE 754 arithmetic)
* conversions
About "conversions", float : int -> float seems to be slow (compared
to a cast in C at least). Is there any way to optimize it when it
intervene in an algebraic expression? (Frequently on has to write
things like: for i=0 to n do let x = float i / float n in ... done)
I understand that float values need to be boxed to "dialog" with
polymorphic functions. Let me picture it as
+--------+ f : float -> float +--------+
| | --------------------> | |
+--------+ +--------+
| |
V V
+--------+ +--------+
| double | | double |
+--------+ +--------+
However, couldn't we imagine that functions with float arguments or
return value have "two interfaces": the standard one (where one knows
the pointer) and another one (which gives the value) :
+--------+ f : float -> float +--------+
| | --------------------> | |
+--------+ +--------+
| |
V V
+--------+ f': float -> float +--------+
| double | --------------------> | double |
+--------+ +--------+
The _idea_, in C parlance, is to declare f(x) as &(f'(*x)). Now, the
boxing should allow the GC to take care of these values. But, if a
function returning a float feeds another function expecting a float,
the compiler could connect the "bottom lines" instead of passing
through the pointers:
f : 'a -> float +--------+ +--------+ g : float -> 'b
-----------------> | | | | ----------------->
+--------+ +--------+
| |
V V
f': 'a -> float +--------+ +--------+ g': float -> 'b
-----------------> | double |----->| double | ----------------->
+--------+ +--------+
This kind of idea could also apply to recursive functions passing
float values along the recursion...
My question is: is this type of idea workable? Is it difficult to
implement? (In a way it just generalize the special treatment of
arithmetic expressions.) Maybe this can be generalized further to put
float references & equalities under the same umbrella?
Bear in mind I am not a compiler expert (and people even giving
compiling courses here are not very helpful), so my questions are also
a way for me to learn a little something...
Cheers,
ChriS
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners