Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library Arthur A. Gleckler (14 May 2016 16:07 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library Alex Shinn (14 May 2016 22:44 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library William D Clinger (21 May 2016 06:53 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library Alex Shinn (21 May 2016 16:38 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library John Cowan (21 May 2016 17:01 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library William D Clinger (21 May 2016 17:36 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library John Cowan (22 May 2016 04:23 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library William D Clinger (21 May 2016 17:23 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library John Cowan (22 May 2016 06:38 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library Alex Shinn (23 May 2016 02:49 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library John Cowan (23 May 2016 03:50 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library William D Clinger (23 May 2016 04:30 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library Alex Shinn (23 May 2016 04:56 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library John Cowan (23 May 2016 13:19 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library William D Clinger (23 May 2016 15:45 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library John Cowan (23 May 2016 16:52 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library William D Clinger (23 May 2016 18:01 UTC)
Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library John Cowan (23 May 2016 20:32 UTC)

Re: New draft of SRFI 130: Cursor-based string library Alex Shinn 23 May 2016 04:56 UTC

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 1:30 PM, William D Clinger <xxxxxx@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>
> Part of that performance advantage comes from hiding all
> manipulation of cursor-like things behind the abstraction,
> where they can be implemented in terms of low-level
> operations for which performant systems will generate
> inline code.

But cursors _are_ an abstraction.  An implementation
could in fact simply equate cursors with indexes, and
inline all operations, taking advantage of the range of
cursors to always use fixnum operations.  This has
zero overhead, and in fact the potential to be faster
than raw indexes.

--
Alex