You could use fx+ if you're guaranteed to be operating on fixnums. (You probably knew this already though)
On 9/29/05, Daishi Kato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Original Subject: wishlist: numbers egg (random) support > > At Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:09:03 +0200, > felix winkelmann wrote: > > > > That shouldn't be too hard - GMP provides all the neccessary > > things. I'll give it a try. > > It would be nice to have. Are there any other procedures > that are not supported by numbers egg? > > BTW, I felt the use of numbers egg made the execution slow, > even if it's just a fixnum calculation. Is is an expected feature? > > Following is a small test in chicken 2.2, > but I'm not sure if it is correct to measure the performance. > > % csi -eval '(print (cpu-time))(let loop ([i 0]) (or (> i (expt 2 17)) (loop > (+ i 1))))(print (cpu-time))' > 1 > 142 > % csi -eval '(use numbers)(print (cpu-time))(let loop ([i 0]) (or (> i (expt > 2 17)) (loop (+ i 1))))(print (cpu-time))' > 1 > 1289 > > Daishi > > > _______________________________________________ > Chicken-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users > _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
