Re: [Chicken-hackers] CHICKEN in production

[Peter Bex]

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 04:22:57PM +0200, Michele La Monaca wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Peter Bex <address@hidden> wrote:
> Good one.  Anyway, I find that perpetuating C limitations/missteps in
> higher level languages just because we can't be sure to handle
> interactions safely, sounds like surrendering without fighting.

The problem here is performance.  As Oleg has pointed out earlier, and
what sparked the discussion in this thread, copying and checking the
string every time you call a C function which accepts a string is a
huge bottleneck in real world production code.  We're trying to find
a solution that's both safe and fast.

> In case, shouldn't such a change deserve a CR?

The discussion at hand is about CHICKEN 5, which will completely break
backwards compatibility.  So this is not as much an issue (though as
Jerry pointed out earlier in this thread, we don't want to create
*unnecessary* extra trouble for our users when porting big applications
from 4 to 5).

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://www.more-magic.net