2008/9/12 Andy Wingo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu 11 Sep 2008 23:06, "Neil Jerram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Are you sure? Surely that would require a call somewhere to
>> scm_alloc_struct() with n_extra = 0, and I can't see any of those.
>
> I'm sure -- goops.c:1541 in master. Doesn't go
2008/9/13 Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The GH interface was marked as deprecated in
>>
>> commit a0143ebc24c24198e0dfce9b80f3648feb706226
>> Author: Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Wed Jun 20 22:08:19 2001 +
>>
>> * Expl
2008/9/12 Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I committed two things: renaming the `ChangeLog' files to
> `ChangeLog-2008', and adding them to the distribution. The first commit
> also adds an explanation in the top-level `ChangeLog' file. Feel free
> to amend it if you think of improvements.
2008/9/13 Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Andy Wingo escreveu:
>>
>> My question is: what should I do about this? Wait for the runtime tuning
>> patches to land in master and then merge them? Assume that over time, I
>
> This looks like a bug or an oversight. - 14k is about 3500 SCM value
2008/9/14 Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> i = scm_to_unsigned_integer (index, 0, SCM_SLOT (SCM_CLASS_OF (obj),
> scm_si_nfields) - 1);
There should be a SCM_I_INUM in there too.
Neil
Ludovic Courtès escreveu:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The GH interface was marked as deprecated in
>>
>> commit a0143ebc24c24198e0dfce9b80f3648feb706226
>> Author: Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Wed Jun 20 22:08:19 2001 +
>>
>> * Explain GH deprecation
2008/9/15 Neil Jerram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> 2008/7/16 Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> My post also contained a `uniform-vector-read!' benchmark, which showed
>> a noticeable performance improvement on unbuffered ports. Could you try
>> (and commit) that also?
>
> Yes, I'll do that sho
Hopefully nearly finishing this off now...!
2008/7/16 Ludovic Courtès <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Likewise, `scm_c_read ()' might raise an exception, so we may need a
>>> `dynwind' here (my original patch for `uniform-vector-read!' did that).
>>
>> This is covered by the dynwind inside scm_c_read, i
