lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Joshua Jensen wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Shmuel Zeigerman
Date: 3/2/2010 9:47 AM
In my experience, ASCII Lua-files after deletion of redundant whitespace characters are usually smaller than their binaries.

So, here we go.  I'll use exact bytes this time:

asciidata.lua - 134,280,891 bytes
asciidata-luasrcdiet.lua - 133,759,270 bytes
binarydata.lua after luac - 26,654,637 bytes

Computer-generated code would probably not have much whitespace-type bits to cut out of course, so not much of a point even trying lstrip or LuaSrcDiet there...

Interesting difference in size, possibly indicative of a regular pattern or something more bulky than usual. Would be interested in a snippet as an indication of what asciidata.lua looks like... curious.

Load asciidata.lua - 1.99 seconds
Load asciidata-luasrcdiet.lua - 1.98 seconds
Load binarydata.lua - 0.07 seconds

I measured the in-memory parsing/loading difference at about 9. It looks to me that there might be a pattern in asciidata.lua that is making parsing slower. Just a wild stab in the dark...

But no matter, binary chunks are fast.

Still, if binary chunks on LuaJIT2 is a moving target, then I guess you would need to either contribute code (and track a moving target) or sponsor its development...

Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia