Comment by muglug

Comment by muglug 2 months ago

View on Hacker News

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…

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
  
  muglug 2 months ago
  
  "pretty" was doing too much work, but there's the twin cost of reading and parsing the file, which usually needs to be done twice (once for static reflection, and once for analysis). The reading and parsing eats up about 16% of the analysis phase, and slightly more overall — maybe 20% of the total runtime.
  
  Reply View | 1 reply
  
  fastball 2 months ago
  
  Parsing is not IO and clearly an area you can get much better performance in-program.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies