This is the mail archive of the
guile@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: Making Guile slower
Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.ping.de> writes:
> Greg Harvey <Greg.Harvey@thezone.net> writes:
>
> > Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.ping.de> writes:
> >
> > > Is anyone worried about this change re performance?
> > >
> > > 1999-12-10 Greg Harvey <Greg.Harvey@thezone.net> (applied --12/10/99 gjb)
> > >
> > > * smob.c (scm_smob_prehistory): initialize allocated smob
> > >
> > > * tags.h: new tag: scm_tc16_allocated
> > >
> > > * gc.c (scm_gc_for_newcell): set the car of the new cell
> > > to scm_tc16_allocated
> > > * pairs.h (SCM_NEWCELL): set the car to scm_tc16_allocated
> > > (scm_gc_mark): mark allocated cells.
> > >
> > > I am somewhat, because SCM_NEWCELL now seems to perform one more
> > > operation.
> >
> > Did you even think about what this is accomplishing before you started
> > worrying about the performance or are you now just on a hunt to show
> > that we're trying to make guile perform poorly?
>
> Errm, I wrote this hastily, and I'm sorry that I gave the impression
> of wanting to cause trouble again. What really motivated me to bring
> this up was that Mikael showed a slow down of Guile, and this was the
> change that might have been a performance impact in my opinion.
> Honest.
Yeah, I was a bit grouchy at the time (see "The gc change" ;). I did
point this out to Mikael as a possible contributor to the degraded
performance he saw.
> [ It might have helped to quickly note in the ChangeLog that this was
> a bugfix. You should also change scm_debug_newcell, I think. ]
Urgh. Yeah (I was updating two trees at once with the change, and
since I wasn't the one who actually applied it to the cvs tree I
didn't get the chance to realize I'd omitted it). I'll post a fixed
patch to guile-sources shortly :).
--
Gregh