Bruce,

Turns out I am wrong.  ACL 4.3.2 on NT is somewhat faster (and generates
tighter code) than ACL 4.3 on Linux.  The NT compiler is of later vintage
and includes more optimizations.

Jim.

At 09:16 AM 3/15/98 -0500, Bruce Tobin wrote:
>    I have written a small  application the same way (as far as
>possible) in Java, Dylan, Common Lisp, and Smalltalk.  The application
>is a simple version of the CN2 rule induction algorithm.  The source
>code for each version  is available at:
>
>      www.infinet.com/~btobin/perf.html
>
>    The timings for each (5 trials):
>    Java (VJ++ 6.0 preview):
>        1       9.304 seconds
>        2       7.521 seconds
>        3       7.121 seconds
>        4       7.381 seconds
>        5       7.832 seconds
>
>    Lisp (ACL/Win3.02):
>         1      11.997 seconds
>         2      11.557 seconds
>         3      11.397 seconds
>         4      11.686 seconds
>         5      11.476 seconds
>
>    Dylan (Harlequin Dylan 1.0 beta 2):
>        1       6.965591 seconds
>        2       7.729048 seconds
>        3       7.093233 seconds
>        4       7.170502 seconds
>        5       7.785091 seconds
>
>    Smalltalk (Smalltalk MT 1.5 beta 3): 10.3 seconds.
>        1      8.422 seconds
>        2      8.492 seconds
>        3      8.301 seconds
>        4      8.492 seconds
>        5      8.352 seconds
>
>    Your advice on speeding up the Lisp code is solicited, but I think
>my main problem is that I'm using ACL/Win3.02 instead of ACL 4.3 for
>NT.  I've run the code under 4.3 for Linux, and the times were
>excellent:
>
>Lisp (ACL 4.3 for Linux):
>
>1          2.624 seconds
>2          2.524 seconds
>3          2.515 seconds
>4          2.525 seconds
>5          2.510 seconds
>
>Does anyone have 4.3 for Linux and 4.3 for NT running on the same
>machine?  How does performance differ from one to the other?
>
>Thanks,
>Bruce T.
>
>
>
>
>
>