[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Low level things in C or Scheme
From: |
Mikael Djurfeldt |
Subject: |
Re: Low level things in C or Scheme |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:34:33 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090019 (Oort Gnus v0.19) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Thamer Al-Harbash <address@hidden> writes:
> It's funny you should talk about layering. I've recently started
> writing a project at work (or re-writing for the Nth time thanks
> to changes being requested), and I chose doing the high level
> work in guile just so I could say "ok done," and get back to more
> important things.
>
> The funny thing is, thanks to guile's seamless use of arbitrarily
> big numbers (its numerical tower), I don't know if I *want* to do
> my number crunching in C anymore. This project is slowly becoming
> 100% scheme as I remove the final bits of C from it.
I've been through something similar. I've written a neuron simulator
which I've used in my research for several years.
Originally, a lot of things was done with C++. Guile was only used as
a scripting language, gluing pieces together. Then, during the years,
I tended to do more and more on the Scheme level.
Now, I write almost everything in Scheme.
> I have not noticed any significant penalty in performance.
For me, there would be a penalty if the inner loops were on the Scheme
level. Now, however, I do most computations using my Matlab-like
GOOPS-based matrix library
(http://kvast.blakulla.net/mdj/matrix-1.2.0.tar.gz). So, even though
the algorithms are written in Guile Scheme, the overhead gets drowned
by the heavy crunching vector and matrix loops on the C level in the
library.
(BTW, if any of the people who have written to me regarding this
library and possible collaboration with other projects, I have to
apologize for not getting back to you quickly. I will do that soon.)
Best regards,
Mikael D.
Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, tomas, 2003/04/28
- Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, Rob Browning, 2003/04/28
- Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, MJ Ray, 2003/04/28
- Low level things in C or Scheme [was Stupid module and pregexp questions], tomas, 2003/04/29
- Re: Low level things in C or Scheme [was Stupid module and pregexp questions], Thamer Al-Harbash, 2003/04/29
- Re: Low level things in C or Scheme,
Mikael Djurfeldt <=
- Re: Low level things in C or Scheme, Ken Anderson, 2003/04/29
Re: Low level things in C or Scheme [was Stupid module and pregexp questions], Robert Uhl, 2003/04/30
Re: Low level things in C or Scheme [was Stupid module and pregexp questions], Thamer Al-Harbash, 2003/04/30
Re: Low level things in C or Scheme [was Stupid module and pregexp questions], tomas, 2003/04/30
Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, Robert Uhl, 2003/04/28
- Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, MJ Ray, 2003/04/29
- Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, Tom Lord, 2003/04/29
- Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, Ken Anderson, 2003/04/29
- Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, tomas, 2003/04/30
- Re: Stupid module and pregexp questions, Tom Lord, 2003/04/30