Comment by brobdingnagians
5 months ago
My assumption is that creating a compiler and runtime to match sbcl isn't in scope for racket, so it wouldn't be polite to request racket to do so :) there were probably other benefits of similar orthogonal features, where racket users don't necessarily need it, but another language/runtime already has it because that's where people who need that go
Isn't Racket using the (also) very fast Chez Scheme underneath?
SBCL is disgustingly performant, and while Racket is fine for most applications you'll still notice sometimes that it's executed on a VM and hasn't prioritised speed to the same degree.
In addition, Common Lisp provides standardized ways to get fast code: OPTIMIZE policy, type annotations, stack allocations, disassemblies, etc. This is all there before you get to SBCL's specific tools for optimization and profiling.
Chez compiles, I think, its not a VM. It’s not as fast as SBCL of course, but it’s not interpreted.
5 replies →