|
in reply to Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 15: RPerl v1.2 Kickstarter Now Live
Show progress. Your funding is past your first benchmark. Show that you reach it. Show exactly how much you burned to get there. Show how fast it actually is now, and how (and why how) it will be faster at next funding step. Many people have been burned by KickStarter. Expect progress payments, just ahead of demo'd progress and need, not a fat war chest. |
Re^2: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 15: RPerl v1.2 Kickstarter Now Live
by Laurent_R (Canon) on Sep 24, 2015 at 22:16 UTC
|
I agree with Anonymous Monk. This looks exciting and I might be tempted help to help and give a few bucks, but your only link is to the fund raising campaign (a nice clip, BTW), but nothing related to the project objectives, or about the project progress, nothing about the results so far, nothing about what the simplified Perl to work with your compiler is supposed to mean, and so on.
Also, the only benchmark is, I understand, an astronomy n-body problem, so, I would guess, a very CPU-intensive problem, with possibly some opportunities for multi-threading or even massive parallel processing. Any way to get more details? About other types of processing where performance matters?
To Will: can you supply tools and data where I could test (and understand) what you are doing?
| [reply] |
|
|
Hi Laurent,
I am a bit confused by your questions... Did you actually scroll down past the video on the Kickstarter page??? I believe all the information you seek is already published there: project objectives, project progress, results so far, etc.
More info about the benchmarks is here.
More info on using (and testing) RPerl is here.
After reading all this, please don't hesitate to let me know if you have any further questions.
Perling,
~ Will the Chill
| [reply] |
|
|
Hi Will,
sorry if I did not answered earlier, I saw your answer a couple of days ago, but I was on a trip 600 miles from home with only limited access to the Internet through a mobile device, and not really able to look in detail to your links. I have now gone through your links rather extensively.
Your project seems quite interesting to me. To tell the truth, at least 95% of the time, I am just happy enough with Perl's speed, I am really interested with Perl's expressive power and ease of coding something real in a relatively few lines of code. Now, having said that, there are the perhaps 5% left where I could have use of higher performance and would be willing to give up some of what you call high magic syntax for that speed improvement. Although if regexes and coderefs, to name just some of these features, are part of the forbidden high magic, then I am not sure I am willing to give that up.
OK, I understand that you need to start with a subset of Perl because you can't include all the features of Perl in just one go. But is the Rperl project much more than something akin to XS or Inline::You_name_it compiling into C++ a language whose syntax is vaguely similar to "Baby Perl"? If that's all there is to it, that's a bit far away from the hype you are doing around it.
I might still buy it if I can write my program in normal full-fledged Perl (or my own subset of Perl, some of the high magic features, I probably don't use anyway, and some others not too often or very rarely) and have low-magic super-fast subroutines confined to a part of the program or an auxiliary module (just as I could write most of my application in Perl and in-line for example some C code for some limited speed-critical computation). What I have read on your Web pages seems to indicate that this should be possible, but I haven't seen any example showing how practical this would be.
My problem, though, is that your Web pages seem to be more oriented towards hype (and fund raising, nothing pejorative in my view when I say that) than toward actually giving us means of actually using and testing Rperl, and perhaps even possibly help you in this project possibly with other means than just contributing cash (after all, Perl Monks has a lot of incredibly gifted individuals, very knowledgeable with Perl and other IT-related topics).
In brief, I wish I could easily download a demo, standard Perl and Rperl, see and understand the code, run it, perhaps modify it, and see the results for myself.
OK, having said all that, back to your OP. My knowledge of Perl is part of the reason I am earning a very decent income, better than ever before, I think I can spare a few bucks for your piggy bank, and I will contribute to your project as soon as I finish writing this post, but only for a small amount at this point because I would need more (or perhaps some thing else) from you to be fully convinced.
I sincerely hope that you will be able to bring this project to success.
| [reply] |
Re^2: Perl 5 Optimizing Compiler, Part 15: RPerl v1.2 Kickstarter Now Live
by Will_the_Chill (Pilgrim) on Sep 25, 2015 at 23:46 UTC
|
| [reply] |
|
|
I would say that the above three have delivered a great amount of value already.
The list doesn't really go "on and on", but have you applied for a Perl Grant for RPerl?
Personally, your campaign strikes me as very close to spamming, as you only repost a short blurb here and on blogs.perl.org (and I don't know where else), with some weirdo microbenchmarks that claim to make everything better. I didn't watch your video because I like to spend my video time on cat videos. If there is substantial information somewhere, it didn't catch my eye.
Maybe the three people you mention above are just better at marketing than you?
| [reply] |
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
| |
|
| [reply] |
|
|
If you have a problem with TPF's grant distribution, please take it up with them.
Oh, and maybe stay on topic? Thanks.
| [reply] |
|
|
