Yeap. I totally misunderstood until I re-read the code. On Jul 2, 2012, at 11:57 AM, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
> At Sun, 1 Jul 2012 20:10:30 -0400, > Matthias Felleisen wrote: >> I had misunderstood. I thought you had suggested 'reduction of >> strength' (say going from square to * or double to +), which is a >> generally useful compiler optimization. What you suggest is some form of >> conditional version of this. > > Argument reduction extends the domain of functions to work on arguments > that they can't handle directly (e.g. because they're too big to be > represented as floats). It's not an optimization. > > Vincent _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
