[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Running Lua on Windows
- From: "steve donovan" <steve.j.donovan@...>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:28:02 +0200
Some unscientific experiments, using some of the scripts used in the
shootout: generally, not as much difference as I expected, pretty
much-of-a-muchness. Except the binarytrees script took 38 sec for
mingw (-02), 35 sec for Lua5.1.exe, and 22.5 sec for VC6 (-O2) !
On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Dirk Feytons <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 7:24 AM, steve donovan
> <email@example.com> wrote:
> > I've been looking for a good Lua benchmark suite, but my friend Google
> > isn't being forthcoming. Then I'll do the VC6 vs mingw comparison;
> > particularly curious about the -mtune options.
> How about http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ ?
> After all, it is the primary source of evidence for the "Lua is fast" claim.
> I'm curious too about the effects of compiler options.
> I also remember that somebody was wondering whether the use of GCC's
> __builtin_expect would make a difference.