[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: byte-code optimizations
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: byte-code optimizations |
Date: |
Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:55:41 -0400 |
In other words, it squeezes the unnecessary binding out of each
`c[ad][ad]r'. Three commands per each substitution.
I see, those wasteful operations come from defsubst expansion. Can
you generalize your optimization so it is not limited to car and cdr
operations in the middle? It ought to be simple to handle many other
cases, as long as there are no jumps inside.
- Re: byte-code optimizations, (continued)
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Paul Pogonyshev, 2004/09/19
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Richard Stallman, 2004/09/21
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Paul Pogonyshev, 2004/09/21
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Stefan Monnier, 2004/09/21
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Miles Bader, 2004/09/21
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Paul Pogonyshev, 2004/09/21
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Miles Bader, 2004/09/21
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Paul Pogonyshev, 2004/09/21
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Richard Stallman, 2004/09/22
- Re: byte-code optimizations, Paul Pogonyshev, 2004/09/22
Re: byte-code optimizations,
Richard Stallman <=