Login
You're viewing the discuss.systems public feed.
  • gaytabasedysfun@treehouse.systems
    Oct 14, 2026, 9:26 PM

    @Andrev @mcc the only thing i remember was some comment a couple of years back (i think it was edwin?) saying he had to change the gc options to make performance better?

    but like 2 minutes to compile hello world is clearly beyond the pale. even idris1 didn't take that long!

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0

Replies

  • Andre VidelaAndrev@types.pl
    Oct 14, 2026, 9:31 PM

    @dysfun @mcc

    Here is what I know of what’s going on for chez cheme, and how that relates to other codegens:

    • The compiler being a scheme program needs to start the scheme runtime. Chez sheme takes about 300ms to bootup, so every invocation of the compiler takes at least that much
    • typechecking of such programs is essentially instantaneous
    • compilation takes a while. we generate scheme code and then we rely on chez to compile it and optimise it.

    once we emit scheme code we call racket or chezscheme and have them compile and optimise the executable, this can take a while especially when linking large projects.

    For a hello world this should be fast, no idea why racket is so slow. Chezscheme performs as expected (0.36s) where 0.3 is taken by booting up the runtime, and 0.06 by compiling the executable

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 1
  • gaytabasedysfun@treehouse.systems
    Oct 14, 2026, 9:39 PM

    @Andrev @mcc yes, sorry, what i mean is selecting the racket codegen is still running it under chez, no? just like i can select the javascript codegen and it's still running under chez? i guess it has to call racket afterwards?

    but that's clearly a lot slower. and apparently on the scale of compiling hello world entirely on racket, that's 2 minutes.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0