Peter Bex scripsit: > As you know, one of the problems with SRFI-13 is that it's extremely > inefficient. It would make sense if user code can also rely on faster > alternatives. One of the rules of CHICKEN optimization has long been > to avoid SRFI-13 if you can.
Other than the polymorphism (which should be flushed) what are the known specific problems? Also, have any of Olin's suggestions from the end of <http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-13/srfi-13.scm> been applied? A portable interface doesn't have to be implemented solely with portable code. In particular, Olin notes that using an ER macro for `let-optionals*` and replacing `string-ref` and `string-set!` with unsafe equivalents in the loops and relying on the higher-level safety checks are both wins. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan [email protected] They do not preach that their God will rouse them A little before the nuts work loose. They do not teach that His Pity allows them to drop their job when they damn-well choose. --Rudyard Kipling, "The Sons of Martha" _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
