[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: in defense of C
In article <1942@skye.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton) writes:
> You say this as if it were typical of better compilers on machines
> other than SPARCs, such as, maybe, 68020s. Can they really have safe
> CARs and CDRs, without loss of speed, on a 68020?
I don't know about the internals of any LISP system other than the ones I
have written. In the one I am now writing for the 680x0, one can have
safe CARs and CDRs without loss of speed. One has to test to see if it is
(1) a valid list, or (2) NIL, anyway. So, one just makes that a test for
(1) a valid list, or (2) anything else. In my system, that's testing a
single bit. In case 1, do the job. In case 2, return NIL.
Eric Pepke INTERNET: pepke@gw.scri.fsu.edu
Supercomputer Computations Research Institute MFENET: pepke@fsu
Florida State University SPAN: scri::pepke
Tallahassee, FL 32306-4052 BITNET: pepke@fsu
Disclaimer: My employers seldom even LISTEN to my opinions.
Meta-disclaimer: Any society that needs disclaimers has too many lawyers.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: in defense of C
- From: Tim Moore <zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!cdr.utah.edu!moore@think.com>
- Re: in defense of C
- From: John Gateley <cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!swbatl!texbell!texsun!smunews!ti-csl!m2!gateley@yale-zoo.arpa>