[main]Notes on TeXmacs

Scheming

We discuss some aspects of the choice of the Scheme language implementation used in TeXmacs.

[6.1.2021]

In TeXmacs we use GNU Guile version 1.8 as embedded Scheme interpreter. Lately, this has been a source of problems, mostly related to packaging. On one hand Guile 1.8 is no more supported in standard Linux distributions. This implies that we have either to ship Guile in our codebase or maintain a private repository for Guile 1.8. On the other hand more recent versions of Guile compile the sources to bytecode and introduce a separated expansion and evaluation phases which break part of our codebase. Moreover while Guile 2 has a fine compiler, it has been for some time quite slow in interpreting code and only recently with the introduction of a JIT compiler in Guile 3 the interpreted code runs as fast as in Guile 1.8. Finally we have some difficulties in compiling Guile 2 on Windows and Guile 3 seems not yet be supported there. The GNU Lilypond project seems to have run into similar issues with Guile and they also remained with Guile 1.8.8 (see here).

This situation is not very nice and we would like to move forward and remove these problems. Therefore we are currently evaluating various possible strategies to evolve the way we run Scheme code within TeXmacs. The following are the criteria we want to take into account.

As for the available alternatives, the situation so far is the following.

The development branches of TeXmacs for Guile 3 and S7 can be found here:

We performed some test of these alternative implementations to help us make a preliminary picture. We used some standard R7RS benchmarks found here and we got the results shown below on a MacBook Air (2019). They show that S7 is consistently the fastest interpreter wrt. Chibi or Guile 1.8. We also see that, as expected, Chez is among the fastest implementations available with consistent timings all across the benchmarks.

We currently have working implementations of TeXmacs with Guile 1.8, S7 and Guile 3.0.4 and what we see from preliminary tests is that boot time of S7 is comparable to that of Guile 3.0.4 (0.4 sec) and half of that of Guile 1.8 (0.8 sec). Also compile the full manual require the roughly the same time to all the three implementations (~15 sec). We would need to consider more intensive tests to discriminate the tradeoffs in performances of the various choices.

Here are the results of the R7RS benchmarks. The symbol ∅ denotes that the program exceeded a conventional time limit and was interrupted.

test

s7

chibi 0.9.1

chez 9.5.1

guile 1.8.8

guile 3.0.4

browse:2000

24.27

0.84

76.63

12.06

deriv:10000000

25.19

97.11

1.15

67.27

18.58

destruc:600:50:4000

52.08

94.90

2.21

7.14

diviter:1000:1000000

9.69

55.88

1.81

82.75

15.45

divrec:1000:1000000

11.80

50.91

2.19

82.04

17.41

puzzle:1000

27.72

270.98

1.66

221.49

18.09

triangl:22:1:50

33.93

110.86

1.91

107.15

8.52

tak:40:20:11:1

12.93

55.19

1.66

134.21

4.76

takl:40:20:12:1

20.97

3.71

9.46

ntakl:40:20:12:1

17.07

95.98

3.65

9.52

cpstak:40:20:11:1

103.36

222.13

4.21

258.62

59.44

ctak:32:16:8:1

44.14

0.96

fib:40:5

10.22

96.25

3.63

236.65

12.09

fibc:30:10

25.80

0.71

fibfp:35.0:10

1.89

42.79

3.18

56.26

22.00

sum:10000:200000

6.64

99.79

3.59

6.87

sumfp:1000000.0:500

2.50

85.36

4.25

111.78

42.06

fft:65536:100

32.20

69.76

3.32

7.69

mbrot:75:1000

24.40

209.51

5.39

50.09

mbrotZ:75:1000

18.56

9.26

67.01

nucleic:50

19.95

79.05

2.59

69.32

15.35

pi

0.60

0.56

pnpoly:1000000

17.98

253.84

4.73

24.89

ray:50

20.46

119.63

2.83

18.51

simplex:1000000

46.34

182.76

2.34

13.90

ack:3:12:2

10.57

74.51

3.12

8.41

array1:1000000:500

11.48

64.18

8.16

138.45

9.24

string:500000:100

1.71

6.34

6.54

1.81

1.87

sum1:25

0.47

121.78

2.02

1.71

4.43

cat:50

1.19

70.95

2.69

28.40

tail:50

1.19

11.21

3.57

9.82

wc:inputs/bib:50

8.27

1.76

73.34

16.96

read1:2500

0.41

281.23

1.28

2.69

5.80

compiler:2000

41.16

115.83

2.99

5.15

conform:500

51.03

199.42

2.10

10.51

dynamic:500

22.74

288.25

4.01

71.60

7.37

earley

5.03

9.49

graphs:7:3

127.61

2.27

23.03

lattice:44:10

139.28

3.91

15.94

matrix:5:5:2500

72.07

214.16

1.63

9.88

maze:20:7:10000

23.26

84.15

1.66

4.70

mazefun:11:11:10000

19.51

122.02

2.86

128.66

9.66

nqueens:13:10

55.11

165.25

4.99

19.37

paraffins:23:10

31.42

5.97

4.25

parsing:2500

39.44

3.35

10.69

peval:2000

29.68

177.10

2.05

107.05

15.64

primes:1000:10000

7.73

21.08

2.64

43.73

7.52

quicksort:10000:2500

94.00

3.90

13.25

scheme:100000

71.46

154.36

2.55

15.14

slatex:500

32.07

173.60

3.73

43.82

45.05

chudnovsky

0.32

0.31

nboyer:5:1

39.27

41.54

3.95

142.86

5.10

sboyer:5:1

31.54

39.14

1.30

155.49

4.76

gcbench:20:1

20.54

1.87

3.51

mperm:20:10:2:1

173.33

659.14

13.33

10.65

equal:100:8:1000:2000:5000

0.78

54.11

0.99

bv2string:1000:1000:100

10.78

11.17

2.47

4.49


[8.1.2021]

Some more benchmarks. Populating the autocompletion tree (i.e. pressing Tab in a Scheme session within TeXmacs)

symbols

time (msec)

guile 1.8.8

8639

686

guile 3.0.5

10300

217

S7

7360

255


[12.4.2021]

Another interesting system is femtolisp which is currenlty in use within Julia for the initial stage of parsing and syntactic elaboration. It is a small lisp with lexical scoping and bytecode interpreter. The benchmarks have been updated to include it. S7 seems still faster on average.

test

femtolisp

s7

chibi 0.9.1

chez 9.5.1

guile 1.8.8

guile 3.0.4

browse:2000

24.27

0.84

76.63

12.06

deriv:10000000

11.56

25.19

97.11

1.15

67.27

18.58

destruc:600:50:4000

27.05

52.08

94.90

2.21

7.14

diviter:1000:1000000

20.02

9.69

55.88

1.81

82.75

15.45

divrec:1000:1000000

20.64

11.80

50.91

2.19

82.04

17.41

puzzle:1000

74.62

27.72

270.98

1.66

221.49

18.09

triangl:22:1:50

34.29

33.93

110.86

1.91

107.15

8.52

tak:40:20:11:1

24.78

12.93

55.19

1.66

134.21

4.76

takl:40:20:12:1

74.92

20.97

3.71

9.46

ntakl:40:20:12:1

60.71

17.07

95.98

3.65

9.52

cpstak:40:20:11:1

49.13

103.36

222.13

4.21

258.62

59.44

ctak:32:16:8:1

101.5

44.14

0.96

fib:40:5

46.50

10.22

96.25

3.63

236.65

12.09

fibc:30:10

64.58

25.80

0.71

fibfp:35.0:10

45.34

1.89

42.79

3.18

56.26

22.00

sum:10000:200000

55.43

6.64

99.79

3.59

6.87

sumfp:1000000.0:500

32.92

2.50

85.36

4.25

111.78

42.06

fft:65536:100

36.87

32.20

69.76

3.32

7.69

mbrot:75:1000

24.40

209.51

5.39

50.09

mbrotZ:75:1000

18.56

9.26

67.01

nucleic:50

50.83

19.95

79.05

2.59

69.32

15.35

pi

0.60

0.56

pnpoly:1000000

107.00

17.98

253.84

4.73

24.89

ray:50

27.11

20.46

119.63

2.83

18.51

simplex:1000000

85.77

46.34

182.76

2.34

13.90

ack:3:12:2

44.28

10.57

74.51

3.12

8.41

array1:1000000:500

59.10

11.48

64.18

8.16

138.45

9.24

string:500000:100

6.30

1.71

6.34

6.54

1.81

1.87

sum1:25

0.73

0.47

121.78

2.02

1.71

4.43

cat:50

28.36

1.19

70.95

2.69

28.40

tail:50

1.08

1.19

11.21

3.57

9.82

wc:inputs/bib:50

39.55

8.27

1.76

73.34

16.96

read1:2500

1.53

0.41

281.23

1.28

2.69

5.80

compiler:2000

41.16

115.83

2.99

5.15

conform:500

47.04

51.03

199.42

2.10

10.51

dynamic:500

22.74

288.25

4.01

71.60

7.37

earley

35.82

5.03

9.49

graphs:7:3

99.22

127.61

2.27

23.03

lattice:44:10

135.43

139.28

3.91

15.94

matrix:5:5:2500

45.10

72.07

214.16

1.63

9.88

maze:20:7:10000

23.26

84.15

1.66

4.70

mazefun:11:11:10000

28.50

19.51

122.02

2.86

128.66

9.66

nqueens:13:10

63.33

55.11

165.25

4.99

19.37

paraffins:23:10

6.12

31.42

5.97

4.25

parsing:2500

39.44

3.35

10.69

peval:2000

32.29

29.68

177.10

2.05

107.05

15.64

primes:1000:10000

13.52

7.73

21.08

2.64

43.73

7.52

quicksort:10000:2500

119.74

94.00

3.90

13.25

scheme:100000

71.46

154.36

2.55

15.14

slatex:500

32.07

173.60

3.73

43.82

45.05

chudnovsky

0.32

0.31

nboyer:5:1

12.48

39.27

41.54

3.95

142.86

5.10

sboyer:5:1

15.42

31.54

39.14

1.30

155.49

4.76

gcbench:20:1

20.54

1.87

3.51

mperm:20:10:2:1

173.33

659.14

13.33

10.65

equal:100:8:1000:2000:5000

3.61

0.78

54.11

0.99

bv2string:1000:1000:100

10.21

10.78

11.17

2.47

4.49