On 2016-01-13 9:32, Dan Leslie wrote:
> IIRC, there's been ongoing efforts to remove SRFI-1 from core; which
> may explain your observations regarding Master.
Just for the record, Dan's right that moving srfi-1 out of core and into
an egg is being done as part of CHICKEN 5, but there are no plans
WEIRD!!
Still somebody having another architecture available is needed to track
this further down.
However I got more infos to share:
Wild guess: this may be some alignment problem.
It does _not_ have to do with anything to do with srfi-1. It just needs
to have *enough* exports in the program.
* Jörg F. Wittenberger [160114 11:30]:
> Tried that too: on AMD64 (Debian) chicken 4.10.1 from tarball does NOT
> give any difference.
>
> But even if it may be an ARM related problem: how is it even possible??!
So next let's isolate whether it's the architecture (ARM
vs. world)type or the word
Tried that too: on AMD64 (Debian) chicken 4.10.1 from tarball does NOT
give any difference.
But even if it may be an ARM related problem: how is it even possible??!
Am 14.01.2016 um 11:10 schrieb Jörg F. Wittenberger:
> Am 13.01.2016 um 21:46 schrieb Christian Kellermann:
>> * Christian Kellerma
Am 13.01.2016 um 21:46 schrieb Christian Kellermann:
> * Christian Kellermann [160113 21:44]:
>> * Jörg F. Wittenberger [160113 12:38]:
>>> yesterday I found that simply having a (use mailbox) in some code had a
>>> huge impact (more than a factor of 3) at the performance of the
>>> resulting exe
* Christian Kellermann [160113 21:44]:
> * Jörg F. Wittenberger [160113 12:38]:
> > yesterday I found that simply having a (use mailbox) in some code had a
> > huge impact (more than a factor of 3) at the performance of the
> > resulting executable. Without using the mailbox stuff at all.
> >
>
* Jörg F. Wittenberger [160113 12:38]:
> yesterday I found that simply having a (use mailbox) in some code had a
> huge impact (more than a factor of 3) at the performance of the
> resulting executable. Without using the mailbox stuff at all.
>
> Meanwhile I figured out that this has nothing at a
January 13, 2016 3:38 AM
> To: chicken-users
> Subject: [Chicken-users] Need help to figure out where this strange
> performance impact is coming from
>
> Hi Chickeneers,
>
> yesterday I found that simply having a (use mailbox) in some code had a
> huge impact
2016 3:38 AM
To: chicken-users
Subject: [Chicken-users] Need help to figure out where this strange performance
impact is coming from
Hi Chickeneers,
yesterday I found that simply having a (use mailbox) in some code had a
huge impact (more than a factor of 3) at the performance of the
resu
Hi Chickeneers,
yesterday I found that simply having a (use mailbox) in some code had a
huge impact (more than a factor of 3) at the performance of the
resulting executable. Without using the mailbox stuff at all.
Meanwhile I figured out that this has nothing at all to do with the
mailbox egg.
10 matches
Mail list logo
