Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH][for chicken-5] Remove srfi-13

[John Cowan]

Peter Bex scripsit:

> As you know, one of the problems with SRFI-13 is that it's extremely
> inefficient.  It would make sense if user code can also rely on faster
> alternatives.  One of the rules of CHICKEN optimization has long been
> to avoid SRFI-13 if you can.

Other than the polymorphism (which should be flushed) what are the known
specific problems?  Also, have any of Olin's suggestions from the end of
<http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-13/srfi-13.scm> been applied?  A portable
interface doesn't have to be implemented solely with portable code.
In particular, Olin notes that using an ER macro for `let-optionals*`
and replacing `string-ref` and `string-set!` with unsafe equivalents in
the loops and relying on the higher-level safety checks are both wins.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        address@hidden
They do not preach that their God will rouse them
A little before the nuts work loose.
They do not teach that His Pity allows them
to drop their job when they damn-well choose.
                --Rudyard Kipling, "The Sons of Martha"