Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] More efficient numbers integration through "scratchspace"

[cowan]

Peter Bex scripsit:

> That's right.  That's why I described it as "an extension of the nursery":
> it isn't actually stored on the stack,

So it could be allocated in the heap or simply as a global array.
Since there is only one at a time, and its size is fixed, a global array
would make sense to me, even though it allocates a little extra space
that isn't used in programs that don't have bignums.

> You're right about the wrapper objects: Currently, only bignum data
> string objects are allocated in scratchspace.

Ah.  Your original posting confused me on this point.  So a procedure
returning a rectnum in the form <digits1>/<digits2>+<digits3>/<digits4>i
will allocate four bignum digit string objects in the scratch space, two
ratnums on the stack, and one rectnum on the stack (assuming the
digit strings are big enough and relatively prime).

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        address@hidden
"Awk!" sed Grep. "A fscking python is perloining my Ruby; let me bash
    him with a Cshell!  Vi didn't I mount it on a troff?" --Francis Turner