I am using the statistical profiler of SBCL to profile these functions:
(defun fact-rec (n)
(if (zerop n)
1
(* n (fact-rec (1- n)))))
(defun fact-call (n)
(fact-rec n))
(defun fact-iter (n)
(loop :with accu = 1
:for i :upfrom 2 :to n
:doing (setf accu (* i accu))
:finally (return accu)))
(defun fact-opti-iter (n)
(let ((accu 1))
(tagbody
loop
(unless (zerop n)
(setf accu (* n accu))
(decf n)
(go loop)))
accu))
In order to evaluate the weight of the recursive version, I defined a function fact-call
that stays on the stack below all the fact-rec
calls so that it can be monitored correctly. Here is my profiling code:
(sb-sprof:profile-call-counts 'fact-rec 'fact-call 'fact-iter 'fact-opti-iter)
(sb-sprof:with-profiling (:max-samples 1000
:loop nil
:report :flat)
(dotimes (i 1500)
(fact-call i)
(fact-iter i)
(fact-opti-iter i)))
Proceeding that way ensures that fact-rec
is never directly called so if it appears on the profiler's report, then it has necessarily been called by fact-call
. But here is the report I get:
Profiler sample vector full (70 traces / 10000 samples), doubling the size Profiler sample vector full (133 traces / 20000 samples), doubling the size Number of samples: 195 Sample interval: 0.01 seconds Total sampling time: 1.9499999 seconds Number of cycles: 0 Sampled threads: # Self Total Cumul Nr Count % Count % Count % Calls Function ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1 193 99.0 193 99.0 193 99.0 - SB-BIGNUM:MULTIPLY-BIGNUM-AND-FIXNUM 2 1 0.5 195 100.0 194 99.5 - SB-KERNEL:TWO-ARG-* 3 1 0.5 1 0.5 195 100.0 - SB-BIGNUM::%NORMALIZE-BIGNUM 4 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - "Unknown component: #x100317AB30" 5 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-INT:SIMPLE-EVAL-IN-LEXENV 6 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - EVAL 7 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK::EVAL-REGION 8 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - (LAMBDA NIL :IN SWANK-REPL::REPL-EVAL) 9 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK-REPL::TRACK-PACKAGE 10 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK::CALL-WITH-RETRY-RESTART 11 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK::CALL-WITH-BUFFER-SYNTAX 12 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK-REPL::REPL-EVAL 13 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK:EVAL-FOR-EMACS 14 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK::PROCESS-REQUESTS 15 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - (LAMBDA NIL :IN SWANK::HANDLE-REQUESTS) 16 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK/SBCL::CALL-WITH-BREAK-HOOK 17 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - (FLET SWANK/BACKEND:CALL-WITH-DEBUGGER-HOOK :IN "/Users/vleo/quicklisp/dists/quicklisp/software/slime-v2.19/swank/sbcl.lisp") 18 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK::CALL-WITH-BINDINGS 19 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SWANK::HANDLE-REQUESTS 20 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - (LABELS SWANK/SBCL::RUN :IN SWANK/BACKEND:ADD-FD-HANDLER) 21 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::SUB-SUB-SERVE-EVENT 22 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::SUB-SERVE-EVENT 23 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-SYS:WAIT-UNTIL-FD-USABLE 24 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::REFILL-INPUT-BUFFER 25 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::INPUT-CHAR/UTF-8 26 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - (LAMBDA (&REST REST) :IN SB-IMPL::GET-EXTERNAL-FORMAT) 27 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - READ-CHAR 28 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::%READ-PRESERVING-WHITESPACE 29 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - READ 30 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::REPL-READ-FORM-FUN 31 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::REPL-FUN 32 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - (LAMBDA NIL :IN SB-IMPL::TOPLEVEL-REPL) 33 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::%WITH-REBOUND-IO-SYNTAX 34 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::TOPLEVEL-REPL 35 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - SB-IMPL::TOPLEVEL-INIT 36 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - (FLET #:WITHOUT-INTERRUPTS-BODY-74 :IN SAVE-LISP-AND-DIE) 37 0 0.0 195 100.0 195 100.0 - (LABELS SB-IMPL::RESTART-LISP :IN SAVE-LISP-AND-DIE) 38 0 0.0 69 35.4 195 100.0 1500 FACT-OPTI-ITER 39 0 0.0 65 33.3 195 100.0 1125750 FACT-REC 40 0 0.0 61 31.3 195 100.0 1500 FACT-ITER ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0 0.0 elsewhere
There is no mention of fact-call
even though it has certainly been called. Moreover there is an entry for fact-rec
. If fact-call
's call is deeper in the stack and fact-rec
is recorded, shouldn't it be recorded as well?
Thank you