[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4
- From: Javier Guerra Giraldez <javier@...>
- Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:52:47 -0500
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Martin <wtxnh-lua@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> It seems I have to wait a little bit for 21st century to arrive into
> my backyard hehehe... :)
i too tried it, and got a little over 5sec for LuaJIT, but then i
remembered that it was a manually compiled package. luajit -v said it
was 1.something.... but a simple "sudo apt-get install luajit" brought
2.0.0-beta4:
time luajit-2.0.0-beta4 -e "for i=1,1e9 do end"
real 0m0.864s
user 0m0.840s
sys 0m0.010s
still not as good as mike's, but well into 21st century!
--
Javier
- References:
- bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, David Manura
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, KHMan
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, Mike Pall
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, KHMan
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, Miles Bader
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, KHMan
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, David Kastrup
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, KHMan
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, Mike Pall
- Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4, Martin