[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: i guess we're frozen & stuff
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: i guess we're frozen & stuff |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Aug 2009 23:37:47 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) |
Mike Gran <address@hidden> writes:
> Hmmm. I should have been watching the clock. I've left master in
> an odd state w.r.t. strings and chars. The storage is available for
> non-8-bit strings and chars, but, nothing can be done with them.
I don't think it's a serious issue.
Just a small comment:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
scheme@(guile-user)> (%string-dump "foo")
$1 = ((string . "foo") (start . 0) (length . 3) (shared . #f) (stringbuf .
#<unknown-type (0x30227 . 0x6f6f66) @ 0x7f1c59c99b00>) (stringbuf-chars .
"foo") (stringbuf-length . 3) (stringbuf-shared . #f) (stringbuf-inline . #t)
(stringbuf-wide . #f))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
The stringbuf object cannot be printed (as shown above), has no public
type predicate, etc., so I think we'd better not return it to Scheme
code. Can you change that in `%string-dump'?
Note for later: it'd be great if we had micro-benchmarks to compare the
former and the new string implementations (on Latin-1 strings, that is),
and to compare Latin-1 and wide strings in the new implementation.
Thanks,
Ludo'.
- i guess we're frozen & stuff, Andy Wingo, 2009/08/10
- Re: i guess we're frozen & stuff, Mike Gran, 2009/08/10
- Re: i guess we're frozen & stuff, Greg Troxel, 2009/08/11
- Re: i guess we're frozen & stuff, Ludovic Courtès, 2009/08/11
- Re: i guess we're frozen & stuff, Andy Wingo, 2009/08/16
- Re: i guess we're frozen & stuff, Neil Jerram, 2009/08/26
Re: i guess we're frozen & stuff, Greg Troxel, 2009/08/11