Greetings! We had a compiler speed discussion some time ago, and the input then was that people wanted fast executables even if at the expense of some compile time. That said, there are some obvious things we could do if there is interest, such as leaving a gcc process open and speaking to it via a pipe, etc. I won't be able to look into this for a month, but ideas/suggestions are always most welcome.
Take care, Robert Dodier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 1/11/06, Raymond Toy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I believe the external process only happens with gcl. I think every > > other Lisp we support has the compiler built-in so compiling is very > > fast compared to gcl, even for cmucl which has a relatively slow > > compiler. > > It's too bad gcl needs to hit the disk, since it is otherwise substantially > faster than sbcl and cmucl and much faster than clisp, > so far as I can tell. > > Compiling the quadpack integrand vs not compiling it seems to yield > about the same overall elapsed time, in some limited tests I did, > so I'm going to just leave it be. > > Robert > > _______________________________________________ > Maxima mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.math.utexas.edu/mailman/listinfo/maxima > > > -- Camm Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list Gcl-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel
