Re: Performance question concerning chicken flonum vs "foreign flonum"

2021-11-07 Thread Christian Himpe
felix.winkelm...@bevuta.com schrieb am 2021-11-07: > > Dear Felix, > > > > Thank you for the patch. I built the current git head with your patch. > > After importing chicken.flonum, I get the following error when calling fp*+: > > > I'm terribly sorry. I'm an ass, I didn't even test it in the in

Re: New egg: nng

2021-11-07 Thread Mario Domenech Goulart
Hi Ariela, On Fri, 05 Nov 2021 09:31:54 -0300 Ariela Wenner wrote: > Welp... that's a bummer. I was sure it was a timing issue with the tests. > > I'll keep poking at it on different machines to see what I'm missing. > > Thanks for giving it a try! Cheers! Thank you for your efforts and for inv

Re: Performance question concerning chicken flonum vs "foreign flonum"

2021-11-07 Thread felix . winkelmann
> Dear Felix, > > Thank you for the patch. I built the current git head with your patch. > After importing chicken.flonum, I get the following error when calling fp*+: > I'm terribly sorry. I'm an ass, I didn't even test it in the interpreter. Please find attached a revised patch. felix From 29b

Re: Performance question concerning chicken flonum vs "foreign flonum"

2021-11-07 Thread Christian Himpe
Dear Felix, Thank you for the patch. I built the current git head with your patch. After importing chicken.flonum, I get the following error when calling fp*+: #;2> (fp*+ 1.0 2.0 3.0) Error: unbound variable: g18021803 Call history: (fp*+ 1.0 2.0 3.0) (fp*

Re: Performance question concerning chicken flonum vs "foreign flonum"

2021-11-07 Thread felix . winkelmann
Hi! Here a patch against the current git HEAD, adding support for "fp*+". Please give it a try, if you want. This is experimental, if people consider this worthwhile, I can submit it for adding to the core system. Note that you still may need passing extra C-compiler options to enable inlining