Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.prolog > #13720

Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer

From Markus Triska <triska@logic.at>
Newsgroups comp.lang.prolog
Subject Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer
Organization man
References (8 earlier) <868d4f75-c293-4929-83b7-e319f4dba451n@googlegroups.com> <m2r0njgghs.fsf@logic.at> <37516061-91b6-4129-8221-4bdb0fa59f42n@googlegroups.com> <6c9c0d39-8658-47b8-8526-2fd11e08fc71n@googlegroups.com> <bdad9f24-5b6a-49a8-98f9-3c2dd3e20be1n@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID <m2msy1n81k.fsf@logic.at> (permalink)
Date 2023-09-04 19:48 +0200

Show all headers | View raw


Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> writes:

> Whats the Scryer Performance of this Example?
>
> /* GNU Prolog 1.5.0 */
> ?- between(1,200,N), length(L,N), nth_member(I,L,E), fail; true.
> (94 ms) yes
>
> /* SWI-Prolog 9.1.14 */
> ?- time((between(1,200,N), length(L,N), nth_member(I,L,E), fail; true)).
> % 94,504,524 inferences, 4.766 CPU in 4.767 seconds (100% CPU, 19830457 Lips)
> true.

With Scryer Prolog 0.9.2 on my machine, I get:

    ?- time((between(1,200,N), length(L,N), nth_member(I,L,E), false; true)).
       % CPU time: 84.182s
       true.

On my machine, that's ca. 15 times slower than SWI 8.3.15, which is the
last SWI version I found installed on this machine. Newer versions may
well be faster! For best performance, I recommend to build Scryer Prolog
with the optional --release flag, i.e.:

    $ cargo build --release

All the best,
Markus

-- 
comp.lang.prolog FAQ: http://www.logic.at/prolog/faq/
The Power of Prolog:  https://www.metalevel.at/prolog

Back to comp.lang.prolog | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-08-31 07:23 -0700
  Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-09 10:42 -0700
    Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-09 11:30 -0700
      Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-20 05:07 -0700
        Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-20 11:28 -0700
          Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-20 11:30 -0700
            Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-20 11:58 -0700
              Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-20 12:13 -0700
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mostowski Collapse <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2022-09-20 17:49 -0700
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Markus Triska <triska@logic.at> - 2023-08-31 21:26 +0200
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-09-01 11:47 -0700
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-09-01 14:38 -0700
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-09-04 04:31 -0700
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Markus Triska <triska@logic.at> - 2023-09-04 19:48 +0200
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-09-04 12:46 -0700
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2023-09-04 12:51 -0700
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2024-01-05 14:07 -0800
                Re: Autum Challenge, 42 is the Answer Mild Shock <bursejan@gmail.com> - 2024-01-06 01:53 -0800

csiph-web