Comment by team_pyrefly

Comment by team_pyrefly 2 months ago

Hi folks, I work on the Pyrefly team at Meta. Our FAQ covers a good number of the questions raised here: https://pyrefly.org/en/docs/pyrefly-faq/. I can also try to answer some of your questions. Thanks for taking a look!

muglug 2 months ago

At Slack we have an internal Rust-based Hack typechecker that’s about 20% faster than the OCaml one (we use both)

Did you see better speedups over Pyre? Aka did I leave stuff on the table…

Reply View 5 replies

samwgoldman 2 months ago

Hack is quite a bit more optimized than Pyre was, but Pyrefly is at least 10x faster than Pyre on the IG codebase.
I didn’t know about the Rust-based Hack checker— that’s really cool!

Reply View | 4 replies
- muglug 2 months ago
  
  Where do those speed ups come from? 10x seems extraordinary for a task that’s pretty IO-bound. Was Pyre ineffectively parallelised or something?
  
  Reply View | 3 replies
  
  CoolCold 2 months ago
  
  IO bound, how you define that? From my perspective, modern consumer grade SSDs/NVMes producing 7GB/s-8GB/s (yep, Giga Byte per second) for reads gives me 1/7-1/8 of second to load that data in RAM the rest of the 1 second is for CPU.
  
  Reply View | 2 replies