Matthew Flatt wrote at 04/24/2011 07:58 PM:
At Sun, 24 Apr 2011 19:24:18 -0400, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
The modest performance hit for "assq" on 32-bit (my workstation) right now is a
small price to pay for doubling the speed on 64-bit (lots of servers).
I forgot to reply to that point before. Unfortunately, I don't think you're
going to see the same effect on other machines.
Oh, you did say something about influence of a particular 64-bit
compiler earlier, but in all my excitement, I didn't make the connection.
If, at the time this new "assq" makes it into a Racket release, the new
"assq" turns out to be significantly slower than the old C one, can the
old one ("kernel:assq"?) be exposed for programs to call directly?
A performance regression in "assq" would adversely impact some
performance-sensitive legacy code that saw a lot of micro-optimizing
last year. Having the old "assq" available as a fallback option would
be reassuring.
BTW, I do like the idea of "assq" being pure Racket code, where it's
more amenable to ongoing work on optimizers, and I don't mean to sound
critical of this process.
--
http://www.neilvandyke.org/
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
