> On Feb 11, 2018, at 12:18 PM, Marko Grdinic <mra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Well, another problem I have is with the language's compiler which is not 
> necessarily slow, but the issue is that I have no idea how fast it is 
> relative to what could be. The .NET profiler is useless and keeps showing me 
> broken stacks due to all the tail recursion thereby making bottom up analysis 
> useless. I suppose you wouldn't know without experience at both, but does 
> Racket have good facilities for optimizing compile times such as during macro 
> expansion? If I could get some indication that I could make the compiler a 
> lot faster by rewriting it in Racket that would be strong motivator for me to 
> do so


The good news is that you can write any module-level static analysis that you 
want and then use the results during expansion. The not so good news is that we 
are only exploring this idea now in any depth and it’s all somewhat ad hoc. 

See Turnstile for how to do this for types. 

See Hackett for eliminating the top-tier of Turnstile and just exploiting the 
basic idea. 

— Matthias

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to