> From: Ludovic Courtès l...@gnu.org
> Oops, there was a thinko in the patch, whereby wide strings would not
> be entirely compared. Here’s an updated one:
Looks good to me.
Perhaps skip the memcmp if the string lengths are zero?
At some point probably should replace all hardcoded '4'
in li
Hi,
Andy Wingo writes:
> On Tue 22 Jun 2010 21:40, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
>
>> @@ -1168,6 +1168,21 @@ SCM_DEFINE (scm_string_eq, "string=", 2, 4, 0,
>> "value otherwise.")
>> #define FUNC_NAME s_scm_string_eq
>> {
>> + if (SCM_LIKELY (scm_i_is_narrow_string (s1) == sc
Hi,
Nice profile-driven debugging :)
On Tue 22 Jun 2010 21:40, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> @@ -1168,6 +1168,21 @@ SCM_DEFINE (scm_string_eq, "string=", 2, 4, 0,
> "value otherwise.")
> #define FUNC_NAME s_scm_string_eq
> {
> + if (SCM_LIKELY (scm_i_is_narrow_string (s1)
Oops, there was a thinko in the patch, whereby wide strings would not be
entirely compared. Here’s an updated one:
diff --git a/libguile/srfi-13.c b/libguile/srfi-13.c
index c4e8571..f29ceaa 100644
--- a/libguile/srfi-13.c
+++ b/libguile/srfi-13.c
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
/* srfi-13.c --- SRFI-13 procedu
Hello!
While profiling a Scheme program, I noticed that ‘string=?’ was
surprisingly high. I ran OProfile on this Scheme program:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
(define s (make-string 123 #\a))
(let loop ()
(string= s s)
(loop))
--8<---cut here--
Heya,
On Tue 22 Jun 2010 21:18, Michael Lucy writes:
> I'm generating some code, and I was wondering if:
> ((lambda (x) (* x 2)) 3)
> is significantly less efficient than:
> (* 3 2)
((lambda (x) y) z) is reduced to (let ((x z)) y) at compile-time. We
don't inline x yet, though we will soon.
Ve
Hey,
I'm generating some code, and I was wondering if:
((lambda (x) (* x 2)) 3)
is significantly less efficient than:
(* 3 2)
or if the Guile compiler will take care of that for me (the expression
is going to be evaluated a lot).
On Tue 22 Jun 2010 00:23, Noah Lavine writes:
> If I may ask, do you already have patches or a git branch that adds [a
> native code slot to objcode]? If so, what are you doing about the
> embedded objcode issue? (Changing the bytecode to leave room for it,
> or hiding the slot in the C code?)
I
On Tuesday 22 June 2010 01:49:59 pm Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi Stefan,
>
> stefan writes:
> > http://gitorious.org/guile-unify/
> >
> > I think it's a good start. Also I will try to make a less rude
> > version of it. Until then you would not like to merge that code.
> > so it is best to keep it
Hi Julian,
Julian Graham writes:
>> Sounds great to me, though Brian & Neil can always come in to correct me
>> :)
>
> Done! See commit ea28e981342fd1d381e489e57cddde97eb390442. In
> addition to the main .texi payload, I adjusted the formatting on some
> of your initial paragraphs and removed
Hi Stefan,
stefan writes:
> http://gitorious.org/guile-unify/
>
> I think it's a good start. Also I will try to make a less rude
> version of it. Until then you would not like to merge that code.
> so it is best to keep it in "playground" for some time.
What justifies such a tight coupling with
On Monday 21 June 2010 11:58:18 pm Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Sounds fun. Is the Prolog-on-Guile code available on-line?
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.
>
http://gitorious.org/guile-unify/
I think it's a good start. Also I will try to make a less rude
version of it. Until then you would not lik
12 matches
Mail list logo
