[luatex] slower texlua at LuaTeX 1.0.4 (TL 2017) ?
dirk.laurie at gmail.com
Sun Jun 4 22:19:11 CEST 2017
2017-06-04 20:34 GMT+02:00 Patrick Gundlach <patrick at gundla.ch>:
>> Am 04.06.2017 um 13:26 schrieb Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie at gmail.com>:
>> 2017-06-03 22:11 GMT+02:00 Patrick Gundlach <patrick at gundla.ch>:
>>>> a sample lua script runs twice slower with texlua of TL2017
>>>> than with the texlua from TL2016 and bare lua 5.3.3 I also
>>>> have on my mac os x 10.9.5
>>> I am not sure if this is still relevant (I haven't followed the whole discussion). Anyway: on my system (latest Mac Laptop with up to date software) I have the same results with tl2017 and tl2016 (minor differences of course):
>>> $ time texlua collatz.lua
>>> real 0m14.837s
>>> user 0m14.552s
>>> sys 0m0.106s
>>> $ time texluajit collatz.lua
>>> real 0m10.231s
>>> user 0m10.205s
>>> sys 0m0.012s
>> I don't think it is a fair or even relevant test of texlua to use it on
>> a CPU-intensive job involving no string processing whatsover,
>> especially one that is easy and natural to do directly in C.
> I don't understand your comment, could you elaborate?
> I just wanted to state that tl2016 and tl2017 have the same processing
> time, with and without jit.
Sorry, my post was a comment on this whole thread, not
specifically your contribution.
The OP has already stated that he is not a LuaTex user, does not
plan to become one, and only raised the issue "as an act of goodwill".
My point is that to criticize the tl2017 LuaTex implementation on the
grounds that it does not perform as well on collatz.lua as tl2016 did,
is not merely wrong because it is one test on one machine, but more
universally because a CPU-intensive task involving no text processing
whatsoever is not representative of what LuaTex is designed for.
In other words, the issue is a non-issue not worth the time several
respected LuaTex experts are putting into it.
More information about the luatex