From: Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: 24102@debbugs.gnu.org, Glenn Michaels <gmichaels@Safe-mail.net>
Subject: bug#24102: Use guile variable objects as SRFI-111 boxes.
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 11:03:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wpixjoom.fsf@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87pop6uk9r.fsf@netris.org> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Thu, 18 Aug 2016 12:14:24 -0400")
On Thu 18 Aug 2016 18:14, Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> writes:
> As I wrote above, the current guile compiler can already do this kind of
> type inference, although it does not currently do this for boxes.
> we can already anticipate having native code generation in the
> next couple of years, and we must keep boxes semantically simple so that
> our future compiler will be able to generate good code for this very
> important fundamental type.
For what it's worth, I don't see the optimization argument as weighing
very heavily on this discussion. I would rather have fewer fundamental
data types rather than more, in the next two years or so. I see the
mid-term result here being that SRFI-111 boxes are much slower than
variables.
The highest performance compilation tier we can imagine would include
adaptive optimization, and when it runs you can know that the variables
that a bit of code uses are bound or not. Also in that case we can
reasonably make any call to variable-unset! deoptimize any code that
uses variables, forcing it to reoptimize later. Since variable-unset!
is quite rare this is no big deal I think.
Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-31 9:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-29 9:21 bug#24102: Use guile variable objects as SRFI-111 boxes Glenn Michaels
2016-08-02 10:25 ` Glenn Michaels
2016-08-04 20:59 ` Andy Wingo
2016-08-05 4:31 ` Mark H Weaver
2016-08-05 4:37 ` Mark H Weaver
2016-08-18 13:07 ` Glenn Michaels
2016-08-18 16:14 ` Mark H Weaver
2016-08-31 9:03 ` Andy Wingo [this message]
2017-03-01 8:51 ` Andy Wingo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87wpixjoom.fsf@pobox.com \
--to=wingo@pobox.com \
--cc=24102@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=gmichaels@Safe-mail.net \
--cc=mhw@netris.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).