Re: Making Guile slower

[Greg Harvey <Greg dot Harvey at thezone dot net>]

Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.ping.de> writes:

> Greg Harvey <Greg.Harvey@thezone.net> writes:
> 
> > Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.ping.de> writes:
> > 
> > > Is anyone worried about this change re performance?
> > > 
> > > 1999-12-10  Greg Harvey  <Greg.Harvey@thezone.net> (applied --12/10/99 gjb)
> > > 
> > > 	* smob.c (scm_smob_prehistory): initialize allocated smob
> > > 
> > > 	* tags.h: new tag: scm_tc16_allocated
> > > 
> > > 	* gc.c (scm_gc_for_newcell): set the car of the new cell
> > > 	to scm_tc16_allocated
> > > 	* pairs.h (SCM_NEWCELL): set the car to scm_tc16_allocated
> > > 	(scm_gc_mark): mark allocated cells.
> > > 
> > > I am somewhat, because SCM_NEWCELL now seems to perform one more
> > > operation.
> > 
> > Did you even think about what this is accomplishing before you started
> > worrying about the performance or are you now just on a hunt to show
> > that we're trying to make guile perform poorly?
> 
> Errm, I wrote this hastily, and I'm sorry that I gave the impression
> of wanting to cause trouble again.  What really motivated me to bring
> this up was that Mikael showed a slow down of Guile, and this was the
> change that might have been a performance impact in my opinion.
> Honest.

Yeah, I was a bit grouchy at the time (see "The gc change" ;). I did
point this out to Mikael as a possible contributor to the degraded
performance he saw.

> [ It might have helped to quickly note in the ChangeLog that this was
>   a bugfix.  You should also change scm_debug_newcell, I think. ]

Urgh. Yeah (I was updating two trees at once with the change, and
since I wasn't the one who actually applied it to the cvs tree I
didn't get the chance to realize I'd omitted it). I'll post a fixed
patch to guile-sources shortly :).

-- 
Gregh