Perl 6 - the future is here, just unevenly distributed

IRC log for #moarvm, 2015-10-15

| Channels | #moarvm index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:10 hohoho joined #moarvm
00:43 hohoho joined #moarvm
00:46 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
01:47 ilbot3 joined #moarvm
01:47 Topic for #moarvm is now https://github.com/moarvm/moarvm | IRC logs at  http://irclog.perlgeek.de/moarvm/today
02:48 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
04:16 vendethiel joined #moarvm
04:49 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
05:51 dalek Heuristic branch merge: pushed 70 commits to MoarVM/even-moar-jit by bdw
06:32 hohoho joined #moarvm
06:32 hohoho joined #moarvm
06:41 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
06:47 Ven joined #moarvm
06:54 Ven_ joined #moarvm
07:11 Ven joined #moarvm
07:14 FROGGS joined #moarvm
07:21 Ven_ joined #moarvm
07:25 zakharyas joined #moarvm
07:35 TimToady joined #moarvm
07:49 leont joined #moarvm
08:06 pyrimidi_ joined #moarvm
08:40 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
08:50 Ven joined #moarvm
09:47 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
09:48 brrt joined #moarvm
09:53 brrt \o #moarvm
09:53 brrt i apologise for breaking the build yesterday
09:53 brrt connectivity in the bus was rather spotty, and when i noticed the error i couldn't correct it anymore
09:58 brrt FROGGS++ for fixing, naturally :-)
09:58 FROGGS hi brrt
09:58 FROGGS :o)
09:58 brrt vendethiel: yeah, comparing gcc and v8 is not100% fair in that way
09:58 jnthn .oO( The wifi on the bus goes up and down, up and down... )
09:58 brrt but it was an.. interesting result, shall we say?
10:04 brrt at any rate, nobody is really asking from dynamic languages to be as fast as C or fortran
10:16 nwc10 oh, I think you're wrong there. Plenty of folks want the moon, on a stick, now, for free.
10:16 nwc10 without worrying about whether they are strong enough to hold it up.
10:16 nwc10 no-one sane and reasonable. :-)
10:17 nwc10 See http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/wishlist/moon-on-stick.html
10:17 nwc10 and the image linked there with "here" :-)
10:17 FROGGS :D
10:18 brrt lol
10:18 * brrt lunch &
10:20 arnsholt "May be useful for compatibility testing" =D =D =D
10:47 brrt ok, yes, unrealistic expectations abound
10:53 nwc10 eg "
10:53 nwc10 RPerl compiles your low-magic Perl 5 code to run hundreds of times faster than interpreted Perl, with full backward compatibility!
10:53 nwc10 "
10:54 brrt have i seen that?
10:54 nwc10 I found it here: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/wbraswell/perl-5-optimizing-compiler-rperl-v12
10:54 nwc10 I read it on the Internet, it must be true.
10:54 brrt oh lord, restricted dynamic language subsets
10:55 brrt also, hundreds of times faster?
10:55 brrt is this ehm.. for real?
10:56 nwc10 he's really working on it. And I believe that he really believes that given enough time, he can acchieve that.
10:56 brrt hmmmm
10:56 brrt how restricted are we talking about?
10:57 brrt hmm, no i don't think that can be done, at all
10:58 brrt i mean, handoptimized assembly can't reach 100s of times faster than just perl
10:58 nwc10 as best I'm aware of, no-one else working on anything comparable thinks like he does
10:59 jnthn brrt: Perhaps in some cases it maybe can, but in general I agree
10:59 brrt i'm not sure whether that is a good thing for him...
10:59 nwc10 I know what I really think, but this is a logged channel.
11:00 brrt i'm thinking of the tests of the potential benefits for the tiler i did last year. i got a factor 6 speedup and that was some pretty good code that would have to do some pretty good optimization before the compiler would ever do that
11:00 brrt (from the old JIT, that is)
11:01 brrt now the old JIT will give you another factor 4 speedup on integer / numeric code, so that brings you at most at 24
11:01 brrt and that is tight code where the benefit from JIT compilation is optimal
11:01 brrt most code looks nothing like that
11:02 lizmat fwiw, the way I understand rperl, is that it is a real compiler, not a JIT
11:03 lizmat as in, compile / optimize everything *before* you start running
11:03 jnthn I think we call it "Ahead Of Time", not "real" ;)
11:03 lizmat hehe...  yeah, sorry, /me is old school  :-)
11:03 jnthn .oO( The JIT who wanted to be a real compiler :D )
11:04 lizmat from a time where you had interpreters or compilers, and the two would never mix  :-)
11:04 jnthn But yeah, I think it's been fairly well demonstrated that if you want to optimize dynamic languages, dynamic analyses tend to beat static analyses.
11:05 jnthn The paper on basic block versioning somebody linked here not so long ago did a nice job of showing that.
11:05 nwc10 the way I understand Rperl (without digging into the backend source code) is that it's effectively a Perl (subset) to C++ transpiler
11:05 nwc10 that then takes advantage of all the power of a C++ compiler
11:05 brrt uhuh
11:05 brrt like compilation speed ^^
11:05 nwc10 so, as long as you know all your types in advance
11:05 lizmat what *i* find interesting about rperl, is its semi-intimate knowledge of the Perl 5 grammar  :-)
11:06 brrt jnthn: didn't read that, could you link it again?
11:06 jnthn uh, don't know I have it handy
11:06 lizmat which might become useful for v5 again in the future
11:06 * jnthn looks
11:06 jnthn brrt: Pretty sure it's http://pointersgonewild.com/2015/09/24/basic-block-versioning-my-best-result-yet/
11:07 jnthn brrt: Of note the bit around "To put things in perspective, I decided to compare this result with what’s achievable using a static type analysis. I devised a scheme to give me an upper bound on the number of type tests a static analysis could possibly eliminate. "
11:07 brrt oh, cool
11:08 jnthn Which I thought was an interesting way to look at it.
11:12 Ven joined #moarvm
11:18 brrt many interest, yes
11:19 brrt in our case, it seems that this could already work at the spesh level?
11:19 brrt i'm asking so i know i don't have to do it ^^
11:19 jnthn :P
11:19 jnthn Yeah, spesh level I'd say
11:20 brrt cool
11:48 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
11:56 Ven joined #moarvm
11:59 brrt what's funny is that this: http://rperl.org/the_low_magic_perl_commandments.html is about as far as 'perl' can get from perl
12:02 psch brrt: "you can write java in any language" comes to mind
12:03 brrt supposing the benchmarks are real, it's pretty impressive though
12:03 brrt ah, that was harsh, i do believe the benchmarks are real
12:19 nwc10 I have no reason to doubt the benchmarks
12:20 nwc10 I'm just not convinced that this is a better trade off than using Inline::CPP
13:05 hohoho joined #moarvm
13:08 brrt jnthn: on closer examinatin, that seems almost to simple to work
13:11 brrt (reading further)
13:12 brrt authors themselves admit it's pretty similar to trace compilation
13:13 hohoho joined #moarvm
13:13 hohoho_ joined #moarvm
13:22 jnthn brrt: Which "that" specifically? BBV?
13:22 brrt yes
13:22 brrt and they rely very much on compiling-on-demand
13:23 brrt which of course we don't do
13:23 brrt i wonder whether tracing would be simpler for us to implement, or something like this
13:24 jnthn Well, given we already have a CFG, the idea of a BB-level analysis seemed at least worth a look :)
13:25 [Coke] I would be interested if anyone can duplicate the run times they were seeing. I was unable to get rperl working on my OSX box.
13:25 [Coke] (but I think that was mostly on me.)
13:26 brrt or OSX :-P
13:50 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
14:12 Ven joined #moarvm
14:51 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
15:16 FROGGS joined #moarvm
16:18 Ven joined #moarvm
16:53 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
17:16 Peter_R joined #moarvm
17:53 tokuhirom joined #moarvm
18:23 FROGGS wow, I get a double free in t/spec/S17-lowlevel/lock.t
18:47 hoelzro o/ #moarvm
18:51 [Coke] hio
18:51 nwc10 \o hoelzro
18:52 hoelzro o/ [Coke], nwc10
19:44 retupmoca joined #moarvm
19:55 tokuhiro_ joined #moarvm
20:05 dalek joined #moarvm
21:56 tokuhiro_ joined #moarvm
22:23 leont joined #moarvm
22:50 tokuhiro_ joined #moarvm
23:30 diakopter joined #moarvm
23:31 dalek joined #moarvm
23:35 Util joined #moarvm
23:39 hohoho joined #moarvm

| Channels | #moarvm index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary