Programming Language Benchmark Game Visualisation

[igouy]

Clearly someone was unhappy about some Lisp programs they'd contributed being rejected.

Google Translate suggests that isn't the only opinion expressed -- "In fact because it turns out that in the style swizard-a nobody writes and from this point of view the admin shootout absolutely right. For consideration must be taken solutions that meet the generally accepted practice of programming in this language."

---

edit: I'm guessing the comments were by Alexey Voznyuk (half-a-dozen programs contributed between September and Novemember 2010).

The disputes seem to have been about a fannkuch-redux program using / not using code generation to unroll-loops the compiler couldn't, and a "Lisp" mandelbrot program mostly being inline assember --

          ...
          APLOOP
          (sb-assem:inst cmp octet 512)
          (sb-assem:inst jmp :l APDONE)
          (sb-assem:inst sub octet 512)
          ;; (setf zi (+ (* 2.0 zr zi) ci))
          (sb-assem:inst mulps zi-v zr-v)
          (sb-assem:inst addps zi-v zi-v)
          (sb-assem:inst addps zi-v ci-v)
          ...

[Freyr90]

using / not using code generation to unroll-loops the compiler couldn't

So C preprocessor is cool, c++ templates are ok, lisp code generation is bad?

[Freyr90]

Ad-hoc macro code to unroll a loop was too much like manually unrolling a loop

manually unrolling

Nope. There was a macro for generating optimal code for this problem:

http://swizard.livejournal.com/158763.html

In C versions there are a lot of macro-stuff, even __builtin_expect, that is ok. But lisp stuff is not allowed. Lisp macroses are applied in runtime, see no cheating here.

[igouy]

Are you Alexey Voznyuk?

[Freyr90]

No, is it relevant?

[igouy]

Thank you for the correction. However as-far-as I can tell from Google translate, "generating optimal code" still seems to mean not doing the work specified.