From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mikael Djurfeldt Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: goops and memoization Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:13:04 -0500 Sender: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: Reply-To: djurfeldt@nada.kth.se NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1037927705 25425 80.91.224.249 (22 Nov 2002 01:15:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 01:15:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Neil Jerram , Dirk Herrmann , guile-devel@gnu.org, djurfeldt@nada.kth.se Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18F2PN-0006bU-00 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 02:15:01 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18F2Oo-0007S5-00; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:14:26 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18F2Nb-00046e-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:13:11 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18F2NY-00045I-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:13:10 -0500 Original-Received: from kvast.blakulla.net ([213.212.20.77]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18F2NY-00044M-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:13:08 -0500 Original-Received: from linnaeus ([18.42.2.46]) by kvast.blakulla.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18F2NV-0004Fl-00; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 02:13:05 +0100 Original-Received: from mdj by linnaeus with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 18F2NU-000054-00; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:13:04 -0500 Original-To: djurfeldt@nada.kth.se Original-Cc: djurfeldt@nada.kth.se In-Reply-To: (Mikael Djurfeldt's message of "Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:08:01 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090008 (Oort Gnus v0.08) Emacs/21.2 (i386-pc-linux-gnu) Errors-To: guile-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1741 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1741 Mikael Djurfeldt writes: >> Given the gf and specializers, call-next-method works out a list of >> applicable methods (probably cached) in the same way as for a normal >> gf application, then it looks through this list for m and applies the >> method after m to the supplied arguments (formals). [...] > Are you saying that you'd want to compute the list of applicable > methods at every call to (next-method)? That way overhead per call > would become O(NM) where N is the number of applicable methods and M > the maximum length of argument lists. Oops, didn't see that you wrote "probably cached". But if you mean in the same way as in gf application your suggested approach wouldn't work because the list of applicable methods is unique per application arglist signature and gf application also caches per application, not per method definition. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel