[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support |
Date: |
Tue, 07 Mar 2017 21:46:28 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
> This is beginning to feel like bike-shedding.
Indeed. I guess part of the problem is a lack of direction: is there
some benchmark or test case that drives your desire to add that bytecode?
You say that you've found a large proportion of calls to `length` where
the result is then compared to a number, so it could be sped up. I do
not doubt that it is the case, but the question is whether this speed up
makes a difference in practice. If it does, then we can compare the
different options.
BTW, AFAIK there are 4 options (in order of increasing performance):
- leave things as they are.
- implement length= in Elisp.
- implement length= in C (but without dedicating a bytecode to it).
- implement length= as a bytecode.
Stefan
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, (continued)
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Clément Pit-Claudel, 2017/03/06
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Gdobbins, 2017/03/06
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Gdobbins, 2017/03/06
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Ken Raeburn, 2017/03/10
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Gdobbins, 2017/03/10
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Gdobbins, 2017/03/12
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Stefan Monnier, 2017/03/12
- Re: [PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Gdobbins, 2017/03/14
[PATCH] Add new lisp function length= with bytecode support, Constantin Kulikov, 2017/03/07