[gambit-list] Does gambit-c have call/ec?
feeley at iro.umontreal.ca
Wed Jun 27 11:16:53 EDT 2007
On Jun 27, 2007, at 8:35 AM, Marc Feeley wrote:
> On 25-Jun-07, at 4:27 PM, naruto canada wrote:
>> Does gambit-c have call/ec? Thanks.
> Call/ec is not predefined. You can define it yourself like this:
> (define call/ec call/cc)
> Obviously, in this case the implementation of call/ec is not as fast
> as it could be. On the other hand, Gambit's implementation of
> continuations is one of the most efficient. For example, on the ctak
> benchmark which uses call/cc extensively, Gambit is about 2 orders of
> magnitude faster than MzScheme. It would be interesting to see how
> MzScheme fairs when call/cc is replaced by call/ec in that benchmark
> (I can't run the test because my usual work machine is out of
> order). See http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~gambit/bench.html for other
> benchmark results (fibc also uses continuations extensively).
On a 1.66GHz Intel Core Duo Mac Mini, I just tried ctak and fibc on
MzScheme v370 with call/cc and call/ec and I get these relative
Gambit MzScheme MzScheme
call/cc call/cc call/ec
ctak 1.0 113.6 7.1
fibc 1.0 56.1 5.5
So call/ec improves the MzScheme execution times by an order of
magnitude. The resulting performance is still quite far from using
plain call/cc with Gambit-C.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gambit-list