[m-rev.] For review: Improvments to Stack Segments code.

[Paul Bone]

On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 03:38:45PM +1100, Julien Fischer wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 25 Feb 2011, Julien Fischer wrote:
> 
> >
> >On Thu, 24 Feb 2011, Julien Fischer wrote:
> >
> >>Ok, I've tested G12 with the grade asm_fast.gc.stseg.trseg**,
> >>asm_fast.gc.trseg and hlc.gc.trseg and everything seems fine.
> >>
> >>Timings for the large variant of the G12/FD test suite are as follows:
> >>
> >>Grade				Old			New
> >>-----				---			---
> >>hlc.gc.trseg			105s			106s
> >>asm_fast.gc.trseg		128s			128s
> >>asm_fast.gc.stseg.trseg		133s			135s
> >>
> >>In short, there's no significant performance difference with this
> >>change.  (In passing, I would note that the gap between the performance
> >>of asm_fast.gc.trseg and hlc.gc.trseg versions of the G12/FD solver
> >>seems have widened.)
> >>
> >>I'll run further tests in a couple of other trailing grades, but I
> >>expect they won't show anything up either.
> >
> >hlc.par.gc.trseg is is broken, the `bounds_inconsistent' test
> >with parameter 10000000, appears to go into a loop (possibly it
> >deadlocks?)
> 
> Same thing for asm_fast.par.gc.trseg.

Is this a G12 test?  asm_fast.par.gc.trseg passes the Mercury test suite.

I want to commit this soon but I don't want it to break G12.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mercurylang.org/archives/reviews/attachments/20110404/108fa7aa/attachment.sig>