[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration
From: |
Jörg F. Wittenberger |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration |
Date: |
Wed, 11 Feb 2015 13:34:21 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux armv7l; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.4.0 |
Am 11.02.2015 um 13:09 schrieb Felix Winkelmann:
>>>> Personally I'd be more than happy to take the performance
>>>> hit on this so long as I can rely on fx operations and/or
>>>> (declare fixnum-arithmetic) to recover the original performance.
>>>
>>> You can; I didn't change any of those. The "fixnum mode" probably
>>> still works, too (as in "(declare fixnum)"), but I didn't test it.
>>
>
> I recommend to get rid of "fixnum-mode" - this brings up serious
> problems in code that uses external libraries, similar to the case
> when non-numbers code uses libraries that use numbers (and vice
> versa). Fixnum-mode will assume that all numbers are fixnums (without
> checking for this). It is seldom used
Uhm. I'm using it a lot. Together with type annotations. Can't recall
any related problems in around ~80KLOC single project. Seems not that
dangerous to me.
> accordingly, so nothing is won, because the speed advantage of fixnum
> math is that we can avoid the CPS calls and cram more numerical
> operations into a single CPS-converted function.
That's why I'm using it so much.
> Personally, I find the performance impact Peter reported unacceptable,
> and something has to be done about it before we commit on
> numbers-integration. But that's just _my_ opinion.
I'd regret loosing so much performance too. At worst it might leave me
stuck with the 4.0 branch.
But if fixnum-mode is such a burden to keep avail, I'm short of any
recommendations.
Best
/Jörg
- [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Peter Bex, 2015/02/08
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Felix Winkelmann, 2015/02/08
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Alex Shinn, 2015/02/09
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Peter Bex, 2015/02/09
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Alaric Snell-Pym, 2015/02/11
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Felix Winkelmann, 2015/02/11
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration,
Jörg F. Wittenberger <=
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Peter Bex, 2015/02/11
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Peter Bex, 2015/02/12
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Alex Shinn, 2015/02/12
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Felix Winkelmann, 2015/02/13
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Peter Bex, 2015/02/15
- Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][5] numbers integration, Felix Winkelmann, 2015/02/15