From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: fmatch Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 22:57:21 +0200 Message-ID: <87vdaw6bf2.fsf@gnu.org> References: <201005062239.32992.stefan.tampe@spray.se> <201005071624.03781.stefan.tampe@spray.se> <8739y3lav2.fsf@gnu.org> <201005072253.05098.stefan.tampe@spray.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1273438666 5140 80.91.229.12 (9 May 2010 20:57:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 9 May 2010 20:57:46 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 09 22:57:45 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OBDZI-0003eE-Ni for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 22:57:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44899 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OBDZI-0001mN-AZ for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 16:57:44 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1OBDZF-0001l8-JI for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 16:57:41 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=53052 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OBDZE-0001in-0a for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 16:57:41 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OBDZB-0007XG-3y for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 16:57:39 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:51794) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OBDZA-0007Wp-Pg for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 16:57:37 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OBDZ5-0003Zk-6s for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2010 22:57:31 +0200 Original-Received: from acces.bordeaux.inria.fr ([193.50.110.5]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 09 May 2010 22:57:31 +0200 Original-Received: from ludo by acces.bordeaux.inria.fr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 09 May 2010 22:57:31 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ connect(): No such file or directory Original-Lines: 40 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: acces.bordeaux.inria.fr X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 20 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Flor=E9al?= an 218 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 83C4 F8E5 10A3 3B4C 5BEA D15D 77DD 95E2 EA52 ECF4 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:rX4ErAJYz6vdC+i1mm9RzVXKU54= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:10325 Archived-At: Hi! stefan writes: >> Hmmmm. My first reaction is that I’d rather avoid complex VM >> instructions like this and instead focus on native compilation (AOT or >> JIT) when we feel like improving performance. >> >> What do you think? > > Well, I think that for plain pattern matching, a sane compilation is the way > to go in the long run. For unification I'm not sure. OK. I was just thinking about (ice-9 match). Let’s start a separate thread for unification. :-) >> For 2.2 and beyond, I really think the focus should be on allowing hot >> spots to be written in Scheme, which means compiling Scheme code >> natively. This would be beneficial to all Scheme code, not just this >> specific pattern matching construct. > > This is clearly a good move. Hmm Ok, I see your point here. I could write > the whole stuff out in scheme directly. Hmm it would still be nice to have > an implemenation in C and compare with what you get when introducing this > code. Also one should focus on stuff in the right order. So if I spend the > next > two weeks writing a small prolog implementaion. Should we wait untill after > 2.2 to get the suggested speed and live with 15x performance hit? It is > tempting to deliver that system and then spend the next years to shoot it > down into pure scheme. Don’t hold your breath: native compilation won’t show up overnight. ;-) You /can/ implement hotspots in C, but you most likely don’t need to write special VM instructions for that. Instead, you could probably implement primitive procedures in C (info "(guile) Primitive Procedures"). Thanks, Ludo’.