Hi! stefan <stefan.ta...@spray.se> writes:
>> Hmmmm. My first reaction is that I’d rather avoid complex VM >> instructions like this and instead focus on native compilation (AOT or >> JIT) when we feel like improving performance. >> >> What do you think? > > Well, I think that for plain pattern matching, a sane compilation is the way > to go in the long run. For unification I'm not sure. OK. I was just thinking about (ice-9 match). Let’s start a separate thread for unification. :-) >> For 2.2 and beyond, I really think the focus should be on allowing hot >> spots to be written in Scheme, which means compiling Scheme code >> natively. This would be beneficial to all Scheme code, not just this >> specific pattern matching construct. > > This is clearly a good move. Hmm Ok, I see your point here. I could write > the whole stuff out in scheme directly. Hmm it would still be nice to have > an implemenation in C and compare with what you get when introducing this > code. Also one should focus on stuff in the right order. So if I spend the > next > two weeks writing a small prolog implementaion. Should we wait untill after > 2.2 to get the suggested speed and live with 15x performance hit? It is > tempting to deliver that system and then spend the next years to shoot it > down into pure scheme. Don’t hold your breath: native compilation won’t show up overnight. ;-) You /can/ implement hotspots in C, but you most likely don’t need to write special VM instructions for that. Instead, you could probably implement primitive procedures in C (info "(guile) Primitive Procedures"). Thanks, Ludo’.
