This comparison of OO extensions of Tcl is based on OO benchmarks of the OO shootout [L1 ] and consists of the OO Method calls (source [L2 ]) and the Object Instantiation Test (Source [L3 ]).
These tests were performed on a Pentium 4 M Notebook with 1400 MHz under Fedora Core 1.0 with tcl 8.4.5.
XOTcl 1.2.0
methcall: 0.460u 0.000s 0:00.53 86.7% 0+0k 0+0io 347pf+0w objinst: 0.960u 0.000s 0:00.97 98.9% 0+0k 0+0io 348pf+0w
ITcl emulation in XOTcl (see Itcl in XOTcl)
methcall: 0.590u 0.000s 0:00.62 95.1% 0+0k 0+0io 351pf+0w objinst: 1.760u 0.010s 0:01.74 101.7% 0+0k 0+0io 352pf+0w
MIT OTcl 1.0
methcall: 0.980u 0.000s 0:00.95 103.1% 0+0k 0+0io 329pf+0w objinst: 2.370u 0.010s 0:02.37 100.4% 0+0k 0+0io 329pf+0w
itcl 3.2
methcall: 0.870u 0.020s 0:00.92 96.7% 0+0k 0+0io 347pf+0w objinst: 1.790u 0.010s 0:01.84 97.8% 0+0k 0+0io 348pf+0w
stooop 4.4
methcall: 1.640u 0.040s 0:01.73 97.1% 0+0k 0+0io 326pf+0w objinst: 4.030u 0.000s 0:05.75 70.0% 0+0k 0+0io 316pf+0w
classytcl 1.0
methcall: 0.740u 0.010s 0:00.78 96.1% 0+0k 0+0io 335pf+0w objinst: 3.020u 0.030s 0:03.09 98.7% 0+0k 0+0io 335pf+0w
The full source and results are available at [L4 ].
Please note that for stooop, in the method call benchmark, the value procedure has no reason to be virtual since it only returns the value of a data member in its class. Removing the virtual qualifier results in a huge improvement in speed (on my Xeon 2.4 GHz Fedora 1 Linux machine, with Tcl 8.4.5):
real 0m1.668s, user 0m1.660s, sys 0m0.010s -> real 0m0.394s, user 0m0.390s, sys 0m0.010s
Jean-Luc Fontaine
GN It is true that the benchmark for stooop can be improved significantly by removing the virtual qualifier. On the same machine as above, we get the following results:
stooop 4.4
methcall: 0.480u 0.020s 0:00.52 96.1% 0+0k 0+0io 326pf+0w objinst: 4.020u 0.000s 0:04.06 99.0% 0+0k 0+0io 316pf+0w
However, the benchmark specification says that ... the constructor for NthToggle should use the constructor for Toggle to inherit the boolean field and value() method. If virtual is removed, value() is not inherited, therefore the implementation is not correct.
If someone else sees improvments in the tests, please note.
Also, here are the memory consumption results, which are as interesting in my opinion:
creating 10000 objects
Used memory: 4640768 Memory per itcl object: 464 Time per object: 9.43
Used memory: 2838528 Memory per otcl object: 283 Time per object: 17.62
Used memory: 2162688 Memory per xotcl object: 216 Time per object: 7.72
Used memory: 1351680 Memory per stooop object: 135 Time per object: 22.36
Used memory: 8835072 Memory per classy tcl object: 883 Time per object: 548
because the "namespace import xotcl::*" creates a Class command in the global namespace, the compiled version of ClassyTcl is not loaded in this test. On my system, the compiled version scores a bit better than XOTcl both on memory and time PDR
Used memory: 20787200 Memory per snit object: 2078 Time per object: 2006.91
Jean-Luc