From: Andreas Rottmann <a.rottmann@gmx.at>
Subject: Re: New g-wrap supported in guile-gtk--rotty-0.1!
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 17:18:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87llppor70.fsf@alice.rotty.yi.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87oeuotdqo.fsf@alice.rotty.yi.org> (Andreas Rottmann's message of "Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:33:19 +0100")
Andreas Rottmann <a.rottmann@gmx.at> writes:
> Unfortunatly, I guess this will not help much. First, most generics in
> the binding have only one method. Second, I'm not exactly sure how to
> get complexity down: compute-new-methods currently checks each of
> current methods against a duplicate specialization. However, it may be
> save to assume that all methods passed to internal-add-methods! have
> different specializers, so I could at least add them if there are not
> any methods yet.
>
>> An improvement on the implementation level would be to do part (or
>> all) of the work in C. This, however, should be done with preserved
>> respect for the MOP. Anyone who wants to do this should talk to me
>> first.
>>
> Hmm, this would probably mean pulling internal-add-methods! and (part
> of) the functions it calls down to the C level. What exactly do I
> have to consider wrt MOP here?
>
I now have a (seemingly) working version of internal-add-methods! in
C. Strange enough, it does not yield in a performance increase over
the scheme code. Maybe someone want's to review my code and point me
at bottlenecks or other glitches?
I got a significant speedup with a unrelated measure, however: I
blocked GC during the registering of a wrapset (where all the method
and GF creation takes place). This bought me a 20% increase of loading
speed...
Cheers, Andy
--
Andreas Rottmann | Rotty@ICQ | 118634484@ICQ | a.rottmann@gmx.at
http://www.8ung.at/rotty | GnuPG Key: http://www.8ung.at/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219 F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62
This reality is really just a fucked-up dream -- Papa Roach
_______________________________________________
Guile-user mailing list
Guile-user@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-12-06 16:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <87smkc5b22.fsf@alice.rotty.yi.org>
[not found] ` <874qwhsa2u.fsf@zip.com.au>
2003-12-04 9:02 ` New g-wrap supported in guile-gtk--rotty-0.1! Andreas Rottmann
2003-12-04 14:14 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2003-12-04 17:21 ` Andreas Rottmann
2003-12-04 22:33 ` Andreas Rottmann
2003-12-06 16:18 ` Andreas Rottmann [this message]
[not found] ` <1074535797.1517.64.camel@localhost>
2004-01-23 11:38 ` [GOOPS] Specializing <generic> to allow lazy method addition Andreas Rottmann
2004-01-27 15:17 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2004-01-27 23:27 ` Stephen Compall
2004-01-28 2:14 ` Mikael Djurfeldt
2004-02-01 19:41 ` Guile warts (was: [GOOPS] Specializing <generic> to allow lazy method addition) Andy Wingo
2004-02-05 19:03 ` Guile warts Mikael Djurfeldt
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=87llppor70.fsf@alice.rotty.yi.org \
--to=a.rottmann@gmx.at \
/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).