RE: How to write fast Numerical Analysis code in CLISP?

[marcus@ee.pdx.edu (Marcus Daniels)]

>>>>> "Peter" == Peter C Olsen <pcolsen@super.org> writes:

Peter> Matthias --- Your email was interesting because most people
Peter> have told me that AKCL is much faster, once it has been
Peter> compiled.  Was your code being interpreted or compiled?  (AKCL
Peter> "compiles" to C which is then "recompiled" into an executable;
Peter> CLISP compiles to an interpreted byte-code.)

I think there is truth to both claims.  The overhead for CLISP is that
it isn't generating native processor code.  Therefore, numerical and
other types of highly iterative code suffer due to function-call
overhead.  It stands to reason that higher level code, which used more
LISP features, would benefit from CLISP's otherwise efficient and
portable implementation.

Marcus Daniels