On Mon 01 Apr 2013 22:54, Andy Wingo writes:
> Though we already violate them in innumerable ways in Guile, this is not
> one of those cases:
>
> struct foo { a a; b b; } *foo;
> foo = malloc (sizeof (*foo));
> a* a = &bar.a;
> b* b = &bar.b;
To be clear, I was suggesting to allocate som
On Mon 01 Apr 2013 22:03, Mark H Weaver writes:
>>>SCM z = scm_cons (SCM_EOL, SCM_EOL);
>>> - scm_t_port *entry = (scm_t_port *) scm_gc_calloc (sizeof (scm_t_port),
>>> "port");
>>> + scm_t_port *entry = scm_gc_typed_calloc (scm_t_port);
>>> + scm_t_port_internal *pti = scm_gc_typed_callo
Hi Andy,
Andy Wingo writes:
> LGTM if these are addressed:
>
> On Sun 31 Mar 2013 09:52, Mark H Weaver writes:
>
>> +#define SCM_INTERNAL_PTAB_ENTRY(x) \
>> + ((scm_t_port_internal *) (SCM_PTAB_ENTRY(x)->input_cd))
>> +
>
> SCM_PORT_GET_INTERNAL(x) ? PTAB is a his
On Mon 01 Apr 2013 03:32, Mark H Weaver writes:
> This patch changes it to simply fill the read buffer (if empty) and then
> copy the contents of the read/putback buffers into a bytevector that is
> never resized.
LGTM; but the docs are a little confusing:
-- Scheme Procedure: get-bytevector-s
On Sat 30 Mar 2013 22:17, Mark H Weaver writes:
> I'd be glad to see something like this in Guile core. This code is a
> great demonstration, but it has some problems.
It would be nice to reify the original source as a compressed string in
the debug section of the ELF file. One day...
Andy
--
On Fri 29 Mar 2013 06:49, Mark H Weaver writes:
>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (define a (map (lambda (x) (expt x 5)) (iota
>> 1)))
>> ;; 0.008019s real time, 0.007979s run time. 0.00s spent in GC.
>> scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (define a (par-map (lambda (x) (expt x 5))
>> (iota 1)))
On Sun 31 Mar 2013 21:44, Mark H Weaver writes:
> + {
> +GC_finalization_proc prev_finalizer;
> +GC_PTR prev_finalization_data;
> +
> +/* Register a finalizer to close the descriptors. */
> +GC_REGISTER_FINALIZER_NO_ORDER (id, finalize_iconv_descriptors, 0,
> +
LGTM if these are addressed:
On Sun 31 Mar 2013 09:52, Mark H Weaver writes:
> +#define SCM_INTERNAL_PTAB_ENTRY(x) \
> + ((scm_t_port_internal *) (SCM_PTAB_ENTRY(x)->input_cd))
> +
SCM_PORT_GET_INTERNAL(x) ? PTAB is a historical name (port table; there
is no more
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 15:40:48 +0800
> From: Daniel Hartwig
> To: guile-devel@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Extremly slow for format & string-join
> On 1 April 2013 14:59, Daniel Llorens wrote:
>> How can it be slower to allocate the result at once?
>
> Shrug. I do not know much of a
Nala Ginrut writes:
> string-join is a common thing for text processing(include web develop).
> However, our powerful 'format' is not so efficient. I do think it's
> necessary to we spend some time on it.
As Mark says, format is a not very nice piece of code to read, or to
modify, so if you want
() Nala Ginrut
() Mon, 01 Apr 2013 12:00:01 +0800
(define (str* str n)
(format #f "~{~a~}" (make-list n str)))
(define (str* str n)
(string-join (make-list n str) ""))
Here's another implementation, using SRFI 13 ‘xsubstring’:
(define (str* str n)
(xsubstring str 0 (* n (stri
> Daniel Writed
> Dynamic states are not suitable for the purpose. They have nothing to
> do with compenstating for the inability of continuations to backtrack
> _through side-effects_. I believe this will be obvious if you
> consider the problem of side-effects generally, rather than focusing
>
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 04:36 -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote:
> Nala Ginrut writes:
>
> > I've tried to implement a function to mimic string multiply like Python:
> > "asdf" * 10
> >
> > --code
> > (define (str* str n)
> > (format #f "~{~a~}" (make-list n str)))
> >
> > or
Nala Ginrut writes:
> I've tried to implement a function to mimic string multiply like Python:
> "asdf" * 10
>
> --code
> (define (str* str n)
> (format #f "~{~a~}" (make-list n str)))
>
> or
>
> (define (str* str n)
> (string-join (make-list n str) ""))
>
On 1 April 2013 14:59, Daniel Llorens wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>> From: Daniel Hartwig
>>
>> (define (str* str n)
>> (call-with-output-string
>>(lambda (p)
>> (let lp ((n n))
>>(unless (zero? n)
>> (display str p)
>> (lp (1- n)))
>>
>> Out of curiousity, how doe
On 1 April 2013 14:58, Nala Ginrut wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 13:35 +0800, Daniel Hartwig wrote:
>> 2013/4/1 Nala Ginrut :
>> > Anyway, string-join is so slowly beyond my expectation.
>>
>> Also note that ‘string-concatenate’ (less general than ‘string-join’)
>> performs better for the same ca
Hello,
> From: Daniel Hartwig
>
> 2013/4/1 Nala Ginrut :
>> I've tried to implement a function to mimic string multiply like Python:
>> "asdf" * 10
>>
>> --code
>> (define (str* str n)
>> (format #f "~{~a~}" (make-list n str)))
>>
>> or
>>
>> (define (str* str n)
17 matches
Mail list logo
