Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I remember I thought it could go in C in the core nicely enough, or at > least just extending `force' in the core and leaving the actual > `eager' to the srfi module perhaps. I don't remember the details > though, except it might be nice to lose the mutexes at the same time > :), for speed and size. > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2005-12/msg00050.html
Wow, I had forgotten that discussion. In any case, I'm not opposed to putting it in C, and I'm also probably not opposed to dropping the mutexes and just documenting that if you want sensible results, you need to add a mutex when appropriate. However, we'd have to be very careful that the C code has identical semantics to the srfi-45 code, which is somewhat tricky. It may well be that the code you posted back then will work fine, but I haven't looked it it carefully enough to be able to be sure one way or the other. Of course I suppose we might also be able to just switch to the Scheme code (plus or minus the mutexes) and plan to migrate to C later. I'd also like to have all the srfi-45 tests automated, though many of them are of the format '"this" should execute in bounded space'. I suppose we could track that via (gc-stats). -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
