Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Performance of Rust and Dart in Sudoku Solving

attractivechaos.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–72 of 72 posts

Re: Performance of Rust and Dart in Sudoku Solving

#71

Post by damien »

gillianseed wrote: post #70
blinkingled wrote: post #54

Better stats than time using Linux perf utility. Looks like if you can exclude Java's startup time they are all pretty much very competitive. Clang SVN wins and Go 1.1 native build beats gccgo-4.8. Hmm. * java version "1.7.0_17" - 485,284,671 cycles, 0.133074106 (0.0577s excl. startup) seconds time elapsed, 3.64% of all branches missed * clang svn -O2 - 49,227,286 cycles, 0.029045632 seconds time elapsed, 6.70% of al…

Why are you using -O2 instead of -O3?

Or -Ofast

Re: Performance of Rust and Dart in Sudoku Solving

#72

Post by blinkingled »

gillianseed wrote: post #70
blinkingled wrote: post #54

Better stats than time using Linux perf utility. Looks like if you can exclude Java's startup time they are all pretty much very competitive. Clang SVN wins and Go 1.1 native build beats gccgo-4.8. Hmm. * java version "1.7.0_17" - 485,284,671 cycles, 0.133074106 (0.0577s excl. startup) seconds time elapsed, 3.64% of all branches missed * clang svn -O2 - 49,227,286 cycles, 0.029045632 seconds time elapsed, 6.70% of al…

Why are you using -O2 instead of -O3?

-O2 seems to be the most commonly used optimization level. That's what most of the distro software and the kernel etc uses. In the past except for maybe a handful things, O3 was an overkill. (O3/Ofast remind me of my Gentoo days! :)
Post reply on HN