I'd also write STRING-HEAD! in Scheme. For that matter, writing STRING-MAXIMUM-LENGTH and SET-STRING-MAXIMUM-LENGTH! in Scheme would probably improve performance. Inlining the Scheme code would be equivalent to open-coding.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM, Taylor R Campbell<[email protected]> wrote: > Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2009 16:29:27 -0700 > From: Joe Marshall <[email protected]> > > I assumed that SET-STRING-MAXIMUM-LENGTH! was called for > efficiency reasons, otherwise SUBSTRING would work just fine. > > I imagine that the time to set a string's maximum length and then read > it is negligible; what's important is the time to copy a string large, > and the pressure it puts on the garbage collector. > > As an aside, I just noticed that STRING-MAXIMUM-LENGTH and > SET-STRING-MAXIMUM-LENGTH! are not open-coded. Is there a reason for > this, beyond just that nobody wrote open-coders for them? > _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
