From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Performance Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:16:17 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87vd9gawv6.fsf@linux-lqcw.site> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1276938848 24089 80.91.229.12 (19 Jun 2010 09:14:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 09:14:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-user@gnu.org To: Cecil Westerhof Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 19 11:14:06 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@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 1OPu7l-00048M-47 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:14:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43380 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OPu7k-0000JG-7j for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:14:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41606 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OPu7b-0000Hl-PI for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:13:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OPu7a-0003tj-D4 for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:13:51 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:52628 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OPu7a-0003tf-BG for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:13:50 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36D82BD0B4; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:13:50 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=9MxENJ64xbcb00tOxHbMe4fHljM=; b=cRsG2i sHW7rYfKHOpQwFOL7bYNqGXq4hhODQbxb7o2UhSwj69cVJ/h4H395J69aG+IovMu +Q5Jzrmcl5nwp6aaj5U4oxZqMXLgvrA2KKltrSULB0epiQeTCyc1a9uNsYAtpGug w1t1VZjlZ3D3N2fnS/W2Z3ud78qJMe9plQkx0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=EoB0BsuGyTi9gP5rrrhp7vQWvtLaZ+eH 9gCMFPUckZKJzZtN6BIHnKI4yHeZhFsquJp5RIrbMAI1AVPd9QT3rP+cLSLqI7iH RrsLwrt3x63Rm1mFwBusa3GJudcfn/HMYw/+5HaXG+z7laQsxbICRp0nAPsMhzjO i/rOQ3Lmn1I= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2448CBD0B2; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:13:49 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote (unknown [79.151.219.253]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 86BB9BD0B0; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 05:13:47 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87vd9gawv6.fsf@linux-lqcw.site> (Cecil Westerhof's message of "Fri, 18 Jun 2010 22:50:37 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F899F93A-7B82-11DF-BDA8-9056EE7EF46B-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:7902 Archived-At: On Fri 18 Jun 2010 22:50, Cecil Westerhof writes: > Why is this so expensive? The general answer to this question can be found by profiling. You should factor your code into a function, then from the repl: ,profile (call-my-function) I wonder, perhaps we should have a --profile command-line flag... Andy -- http://wingolog.org/