CWS paper

[Stephen Weeks]

> So  the moral of the story seems to be that with the new benchmarks `both' is
> a tie with `call'.  I.e., 7 got faster and 7 got slower,  but  none  by  very
> much.  I'm still confused about the slow-down.  I suppose it could be `luck',
> where some heuristic just got fooled, but I  would  have  thought  that  more
> contification was always better.

Here are the numbers using the native backend.  They show that a lot of the
weirdness was caused by using C.  Now, both is always as good as call with the
exception of tensor.  And both is always as good as either with the exception of 
knuth-bendix and tensor.


                   none  call  cont  both
barnes-hut          6.9   4.8   6.9   4.8
checksum           10.8   4.2   4.2   4.2
count-graphs        9.8   7.4   7.9   7.0
fft                23.4  17.5  17.7  17.5
fib                 4.1   4.3   4.3   4.3
knuth-bendix        8.9   8.7   8.3   8.7
lexgen             20.6  13.9  15.2  13.7
life               31.8  26.8  28.2  26.7
logic              37.4  37.2  37.3  36.8
mandelbrot         25.6   7.3   7.3   7.3
matrix-multiply     9.4   6.4   6.1   6.1
merge              45.0  43.3  42.7  42.6
mlyacc             23.8  13.3  21.6  13.2
mpuz               33.4  18.1  28.6  18.1
nucleic            13.5  11.6  13.1  11.6
ratio-regions      14.1   9.6   9.6   9.6
simple              8.5   7.4   8.7   7.4
smith-normal-form   1.2   1.2   1.2   1.1
tak                10.5  11.0  11.0  11.0
tensor              5.5   5.2   5.0   5.3
tsp                19.4  12.8  13.0  12.8
vliw               14.8   8.0  11.2   7.9
wc-input1           3.9   3.1   3.1   3.1
wc-scanStream      26.2  12.3  12.7  12.3
zern               63.8  33.4  33.4  33.3