Re^4: What's the perl5's future?

I entered a demonstration running 25% to 33% faster with cperl

I see no such performance difference when comparing bleadperl with the current cperl git head. Running perf stat -r 30, I get the following results:

perl-5.24.0

       6101.313876      task-clock (msec)
    18,547,679,958      cycles

bleadperl, v5.25.4-176-g23e15e7

       6027.767495      task-clock (msec)
    18,321,742,652      cycles 

cperl, v5.23.0-3278-gdff4721

       6046.706723      task-clock (msec)
    18,380,297,957      cycles
[download]

All the above were built with -des -Duseithreads -Accflags=-msse4.2 and with all the modules you listed installed, and were run against the script shown in your link, on a directory hierarchy containing 250932 files.

Dave.

Comment on Re^4: What's the perl5's future? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: What's the perl5's future? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Sep 19, 2016 at 14:08 UTC
And I want to say thank you, dave_the_m, for maintaining some cool and objectivity. I honestly wasn't sure what to think after reading—Re^2: What's the perl5's future?—since I enjoy a good rant and the guilty pleasure of indignation by proxy. Then I went and read the email threads' backstory. o_O I would leave or cut down on participation if I had to work with that kind of pointless, unproductive, toxic flagellation. I'm grateful you didn't do so.	[reply]
Re^5: What's the perl5's future? by marioroy (Prior) on Sep 19, 2016 at 11:24 UTC
Thank you dave_the_m. For the example script, the performance difference is seen with Perl 5.20+ versus the OS installed Perl 5.18.2 on Mac OS X 10.11.6 and Perl 5.16.3 on CentOS 7.2. I thought the performance increase was due to cperl 5.22c. I tried Perl 5.20 and Perl 5.22. Both run as fast as cperl. Hurray for Perl 5.20 and later releases.	[reply]