I tried this out, by adding 1.0 as the third argument in `in-range` in all cases. The performance in Racket BC increased, but there's still no parallelism. In Racket CS, it appears to have made things slower, so I need to investigate more.
Sam On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:36 AM Matthew Flatt <[email protected]> wrote: > > At Wed, 17 Jun 2020 10:24:37 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > > - on Racket BC, operations like `+` do indeed block > > ... which mixing, say, fixnum and flonum arguments, but not when > operating on all fixnums or all flonums. > > In this case, it may be the `in-range` with flonum bounds that results > in `+` with fixnum 1 and a flonum. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CAK%3DHD%2BYoCf8O2aO90peZSSVFYybehgKg-iLqgtQcZBA0DU3WWw%40mail.gmail.com.
