[Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A few small performance and scrutiny warning improvements to assignments

2016-07-14 Thread Peter Bex
Hello all, The other day, it occurred to me that when you assign to a variable or a slot in a vector, it's possible to avoid a mutation tracking check, if at compile time the value is known to be immediate. Instead, we can emit code to write the value directly to the data pointer + index. This wi

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A few small performance and scrutiny warning improvements to assignments

2016-07-24 Thread Evan Hanson
Hi Peter, Good improvements all, pushed. Regarding your note about special-casing `vector-length`, I'm curious why you think it wouldn't make sense? It seems worthwhile to me. Evan signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Chicken-hackers mail

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A few small performance and scrutiny warning improvements to assignments

2016-07-24 Thread Peter Bex
On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 09:18:14PM +1200, Evan Hanson wrote: > Hi Peter, > > Good improvements all, pushed. > > Regarding your note about special-casing `vector-length`, I'm curious > why you think it wouldn't make sense? It seems worthwhile to me. It seems silly to ask the length of a vector th

Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] A few small performance and scrutiny warning improvements to assignments

2016-07-24 Thread John Cowan
Peter Bex scripsit: > It seems silly to ask the length of a vector that's statically known. Not at all. If your program needs a vector of constants, thus: (define pi-digits #(3 1 4 1 5 9) then you might want to future-proof the rest of your program against extending this constant by writing (v