[Builtins] Store 'BuiltinRuntime' lazily explicitly #5806
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
effectfully
added
Builtins
EXPERIMENT
|
/benchmark plutus-benchmark:nofib |
|
Click here to check the status of your benchmark. |
|
Comparing benchmark results of 'plutus-benchmark:nofib' on '79cb92bbc' (base) and '49db6d500' (PR) Results table
|
|
/benchmark plutus-benchmark:lists |
|
Click here to check the status of your benchmark. |
|
Comparing benchmark results of 'plutus-benchmark:lists' on '79cb92bbc' (base) and '49db6d500' (PR) Results table
|
|
/benchmark validation |
1 similar comment
|
/benchmark validation |
|
Click here to check the status of your benchmark. |
|
/benchmark validation |
|
/benchmark lists |
2 similar comments
|
/benchmark lists |
|
/benchmark lists |
|
Comparing benchmark results of 'validation' on '79cb92bbc' (base) and '49db6d500' (PR) Results table
|
|
Click here to check the status of your benchmark. |
|
^ -3.15% on average lol. |
|
Comparing benchmark results of 'validation' on '79cb92bbc' (base) and '49db6d500' (PR) Results table
|
|
Click here to check the status of your benchmark. |
|
^ -2.18%. I don't believe it.
|
|
Comparing benchmark results of 'validation' on '79cb92bbc' (base) and '49db6d500' (PR) Results table
|
|
Click here to check the status of your benchmark. |
|
^ -2.84%. Ok, I'll look into it. I don't trust it still. |
|
Comparing benchmark results of 'lists' on '79cb92bbc' (base) and '49db6d500' (PR) Results table
|
|
Click here to check the status of your benchmark. |
|
^ +1.76% on average. |
|
Comparing benchmark results of 'lists' on '79cb92bbc' (base) and '49db6d500' (PR) Results table
|
|
Click here to check the status of your benchmark. |
|
Comparing benchmark results of 'lists' on '79cb92bbc' (base) and '49db6d500' (PR) Results table
|
Quick! Merge it! |
…to effectfully/builtins/explicitly-lazy-BuiltinRuntime
|
I thought this wouldn't be compatible with extensible cost models in the end, but it is compatible. Still GHC-8.10 doesn't like something. I'm closing this for now and I've added an entry about this issue to #4306 in case we want to return to it in future. |
effectfully
deleted the
effectfully/builtins/explicitly-lazy-BuiltinRuntime
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This allows us to be more precise regarding how
BuiltinRuntimes are stored and it allows us to implement a properNoThunksinstance forBuiltinsRuntimeat the cost of introducing an indirection that slightly slows things down at runtime (may be undetectable, but let's see).This is an EXPERIMENT, do not merge.