That case isn't such a big deal, but the general string-accumulator pattern gets used in a bunch of places where the overhead is very low, such as in utf-8 conversion. I'd like to be able to use string-head! there too.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Joe Marshall <jmarsh...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 12:59 PM, Taylor R Campbell <campb...@mumble.net> > wrote: >> In any case, I thought the point of >> STRING-HEAD! was to reduce pressure on the garbage collector, not to >> reduce the time spent switching between Scheme land and C land, and we >> can reduce pressure on the garbage collector just by using the >> primitive SET-STRING-MAXIMUM-LENGTH! if it's available. > > Has anyone measured the performance difference between smashing > the string head and just taking a substring? I'd bet it's a pretty minimal > improvement against the background of the other things that happen during I/O. > > -- > ~jrm > _______________________________________________ MIT-Scheme-devel mailing list MIT-Scheme-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/mit-scheme-devel
