On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Arthur A. Gleckler <a...@speechcode.com> wrote: >> Fluid-let seems to be rather expensive, and this one is called a lot. > > > Would it be better to create an object to contain all those variables and > then pass it around instead?
I was thinking of that and started playing around with it, but it looks like that would involve significant code changes throughout the back end and the various machines. It got ugly quick. It might be interesting to try to design a better performing fluid-let, though. The current design doesn't easily admit concurrent threads. -- ~jrm _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list MIT-Scheme-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
