[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Arch and Guile
From: |
Thien-Thi Nguyen |
Subject: |
Re: Arch and Guile |
Date: |
Wed, 03 Mar 2004 14:01:16 +0100 |
From: Andreas Rottmann <address@hidden>
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 01:23:40 +0100
Yeah. I have hoped my SRFI-35 implementation could be considered
"something tasty" (it's more or less complete now), but so far, there
was no response to this :-(
it is your opportunity to go into scientist mode: response by humans is
just one measurement of its worth (and not a very reliable one although
entertaining at times). you can also measure/observe its complexity in
time and/or space, its dependency graph, its behavior when faced w/ bad
input, etc. you can write another implementation and do a side by side
comparison of above. you can do a non-quantitative comparison to those
implementations that cannot run on your machine. you can try compiling
your code or deducing what extra hints a compiler would need to do so.
thi
- Re: ITLA, (continued)
- Re: ITLA, Miles Bader, 2004/03/02
- Re: ITLA, Neil Jerram, 2004/03/04
- Re: ITLA, Andreas Rottmann, 2004/03/04
- Archive of library modules for Guile, Andreas Rottmann, 2004/03/07
- Re: Archive of library modules for Guile, Neil Jerram, 2004/03/08
- Re: Archive of library modules for Guile, Andreas Rottmann, 2004/03/08
- Re: Archive of library modules for Guile, Thamer Al-Harbash, 2004/03/10
- Re: Archive of library modules for Guile, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2004/03/10
- Re: Arch and Guile, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2004/03/01
- Re: Arch and Guile, Andreas Rottmann, 2004/03/02
- Re: Arch and Guile,
Thien-Thi Nguyen <=
Re: Extended -e syntax, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2004/03/01
Re: Extended -e syntax, Christopher Cramer, 2004/03/01