[gambit-list] Viewing CPS expansion?
dbm at asyrmatos.com
Fri May 22 16:04:35 EDT 2009
Dr. David McClain
Sr. VP, Embedded Systems
Boston & Tucson
e-mail: dbm at asyrmatos.com
On May 22, 2009, at 12:51, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
> Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 12:45:59 -0700
> From: "D.McClain" <dbm at asyrmatos.com>
> Okay, you have my attention... let's see that isomorphism in
> I leave that as an exercise for the reader.
> I have seen my own measurements, and invariably they produce code
> that is 30% slower for CPS form than direct form. Perhaps the
> compilers producing the actual native code have been tuned to look
> for common human idioms and not CPS traits?
> The way you say that suggests to me that you are using the *same*
> compiler to compare a direct-style program with the same program
> converted to continuation-passing style. Unless the compiler is
> extremely clever, it will probably generate worse code for the CPS
> form of the program, for the reason I explained in my first message.
> That's a very different question, however, from the question of how
> the use of a CPS intermediate representation affects the code that a
> compiler generates.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gambit-list