Re: cons to the same object
- From: Tim Bradshaw <tfb@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 12:03:59 +0000
On 2007-03-17 02:24:00 +0000, Vassil Nikolov <vnikolov+usenet@xxxxxxxxx> said:
On the other hand, in any
implementation it is _impossible_, in the general case, to avoid EQL's
execution time growing with the size of its argument.
If you mean that EQL will be slow for large bignums then, well, yes. Otherwse, no.
.
- References:
- cons to the same object
- From: Szabolcs Szucs
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: dixkey
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Szabolcs Szucs
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Tim Bradshaw
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Ken Tilton
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: John Thingstad
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Tim Bradshaw
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Ken Tilton
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Tim Bradshaw
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Peter Seibel
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Vassil Nikolov
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Duane Rettig
- Re: cons to the same object
- From: Vassil Nikolov
- cons to the same object
- Prev by Date: Re: Idiomatic lisp - loops
- Next by Date: Re: lisp revised standard
- Previous by thread: Re: cons to the same object
- Next by thread: Re: cons to the same object
- Index(es):