Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!njin!princeton!siemens!demon.siemens.com!neeraj
From: neeraj@demon.siemens.com (Neeraj Bhatnagar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: ENVOS COMMON LISP
Message-ID: <7237@siemens.UUCP>
Date: 15 Mar 89 16:56:27 GMT
Sender: news@siemens.UUCP
Reply-To: neeraj@demon.siemens.com (Neeraj Bhatnagar)
Distribution: na
Organization: Siemens Research and Technology Laboratories
Lines: 60


I have recently been using Medley 1.0 release of the 
COMMON LISP environment from the ENVOS corporation. So far I have
been very disappointed by the performance of the system. 

I tried the following function as a benchmark on ENVOS Common Lisp 
running on Sun 3/60 with 8Mbyte of RAM and on the CORAL Common Lisp
(from the CORAL corpn. Cambridge, MA) on a MAC SE/30 with 4Mbyte of 
RAM:

(defun counter()
    (setq x nil) ;list of 0 length 
    (loop ;loop for ever    
    (setq x (cons nil x)) ;increase length by 1
    (if (eq (mod (length x 100)) 0) (print (length x))))) 

Here are the results:

	Envos		    Coral
	-----               -----

	200		    1200
	400		    1800
	600		    2500
	900		    3300
	1000		    3600
	1200		    4400
	1400		    4800
	1800		    5900
	2200		    7100
	2600		    8700
	3000		    9400
	3300		    10300
	4000		    12400
	4500		    13900
	5000		    15300
	5500		    16600
(stopped)

Above numbers should be read as follows: when Envos was printing 200/400/600/../5500
CORAL was printing 1200/1800/2500/../16600. I started both executions simultaneously.

CORAL running on half the memory was thrice as fast as ENVOS. Both the MAC and the
SUN were dedicated to the LISP programs and did not run any other program at that time.

In the past I have seen that CORAL on MAC SE (older MAC) also outperforms 
ENVOS on SUN 3/60.



I shall appreciate the reactions of the other users by Email or
newsgroup.


Neeraj


neeraj@demon.siemens.com