CLIM mail archive
reducing time overhead of text display (in 1.1)
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1993 19:31 EST
> From: chyde@BBN.COM
> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 93 19:07:16 EST
> Sender: chyde@BBN.COM
> yeah. y'know, that is one of the things that hacks me off about CL in
> general, is that so many functions have all these wonderfully
> order-independent keywords that cost a bunch of time.
> I think that there should be two versions of functions: the
> order-dependent and the order-IN-dependent. the order-dependent
> doesn't even use keywords, has a fixed set or req'd args. the other
> one is actualy a macro that expands into the dependent function, and
> fills in missing args. that way, the pain occurs only at compile time.
> the programmer is free to use either one, and knows the penalty for
> doing so (and by compiling it out, it's virtually non-existant).
> -- clint
The real question is, why doesn't the compiler do this ANYWAY, without
making the programmer do all that work? Then when the options/keywords
are known at compile-time, you get the "fast" order-dependant no options
The compiler should do this work. In fact, Genera does this for many
of the functions in CL. I presume that other Lisp implementations do
as well. But CL is a big language, and the list of what the compiler
"should" do is endless.
Main Index |