[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10.
From: |
Taylor R Campbell |
Subject: |
Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10. |
Date: |
Fri, 1 May 2020 23:59:07 +0000 |
> Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 15:42:04 -0700
> From: "Arthur A. Gleckler" <address@hidden>
>
> Interestingly, the more times I run my now-slow code, the slower it gets,
> and the slower the trivial test expression I sent earlier gets, too.
>
> And threads-list is now broken:
>
> 1 ]=> (threads-list)
>
> ;The object #[weak-cons 32], passed as the first argument to set-cdr!, is
> not the correct type.
Sounds like fallout from the weak pair #f -> #!reclaimed changes.
- `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/01
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Taylor R Campbell, 2020/05/01
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/01
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/01
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10.,
Taylor R Campbell <=
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/01
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Chris Hanson, 2020/05/01
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/01
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/02
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Taylor R Campbell, 2020/05/02
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/02
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/02
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/02
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Chris Hanson, 2020/05/02
- Re: `read' is now >200x slower than under 9.2 and 10.1.10., Arthur A. Gleckler, 2020/05/02