Re: [racket-users] Case vs. Match

Oh! More fancy that what I expected (link https://github.com/racket/racket/blob/master/racket/collects/racket/private/case.rkt ) It separates the items by type, and to trigger most of the special cases it requires at lest 10/12 of each. Another example, with many special cases: #lang racket

Re: [racket-users] Case vs. Match

Really this is not the best example either. I guess best to look at the source, which is in racket/private/case and, according to a comment in the top of the file, is based on Clinger's paper, "Rapid Case Dispatch in Scheme". Robby On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Robby Findler

Re: [racket-users] Case vs. Match

I think they need to be bigger, but case does have some smarts. Try this one (add a `pretty-write` if you're running in cmd-line racket). #lang racket (syntax->datum (expand #'(case x [(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10) 1] [(a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t) 2]))) On Fri, Jun 3, 2016

Re: [racket-users] Case vs. Match

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 1:23 AM, Gustavo Massaccesi wrote: > > [...] I saw in the docs that case specifically mentions it can > distribute in log(n) time [...] > but both expand to a bunch of nested if, nothing fancy that may run in > O(log(N)). > (I don't expect that it has

Re: [racket-users] Case vs. Match

> [...] I saw in the docs that case specifically mentions it can distribute in log(n) time [...] I think it's strange. I found the reference in https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/case.html but it's very strange. Is it true??? For example, I tried with ;--- #lang racket (lambda (x) (case

Re: [racket-users] Case vs. Match

On Friday, June 3, 2016 at 10:30:35 AM UTC-4, Jon Zeppieri wrote: > There's rarely a good reason. If you were dispatching over a very large set > of constants -- fixnums or characters, in particular -- I'd expect better > performance from case. That's about it. > > > On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:10

Re: [racket-users] Case vs. Match

There's rarely a good reason. If you were dispatching over a very large set of constants -- fixnums or characters, in particular -- I'd expect better performance from case. That's about it. > On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:10 AM, Gerald Pipes > wrote: > > I have been

Re: [racket-users] Case vs. Match

match is far more expressive than case. Think of > (match 3 [(? even? x) (+ x 1)][(? odd? x) (- x 1)]) But of course you’re paying for in terms of run-time cost. Engineering is a trade-off game. > On Jun 3, 2016, at 10:10 AM, Gerald Pipes > wrote: > > I

[racket-users] Case vs. Match

I have been recently using match a lot and I was wondering what was the main benefit of using case instead of match? It seems as though match has the distribution on a single val-exp except match allows for the pattern matching and case just uses equal?. -- You received this message