I just pushed a change that restored everything to the way it was. I'll try to figure out a way to implement string-head! that is portable.
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Chris Hanson<[email protected]> wrote: > 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? >> > -- ~jrm _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
