Hi Alex,

>> Have you measured and/or noticed impact on performance of these
>> micro-optimizations?  I mean, are they really worth it?
> Very probably not ... it is similar to the situation with 'do' ;-)

When you work on the 64 bit version, you obviously implemented
miniPicoLisp "prototype" and now building it in assembler.  How and
when do you decide what should be implemented in C (or asm) and what
in picoLisp?  Do you first implement a minimal neccessary core in
C/asm and a few things in picoLisp and then later reimplement some
picolisp code in C/asm for efficiency reasons?

> Still I think it is good to have certain convenience functions that
> don't evaluate their arguments. Not having to quote their arguments
> makes their use a little shorter and more readable. No big deal.

Probably.  That makes them convenient for manual typing but not so
much for program "transformations" like the original closure example.



Reply via email to