Re: specialized array slower than unspecialized?
- From: "Chris Russell" <christopher.m.russell@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 Mar 2007 13:41:23 -0700
I've piled in lots of type declarations....snipped..
(declaim (optimize speed))
No surprises there then.
Remember that when SBCL can't directly infer types, it treats all type
declarations as assertions to be checked, unless told not to.
http://www.sbcl.org/manual/Declarations-as-Assertions.html#Declarations-as-Assertions
So unless you explicitly optimise for speed, declarations act as a
debugging tool that may well slow your code further.
.
- References:
- specialized array slower than unspecialized?
- From: turing . incomplete
- Re: specialized array slower than unspecialized?
- From: Barry Margolin
- Re: specialized array slower than unspecialized?
- From: andrew.baine@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: specialized array slower than unspecialized?
- From: Alan Crowe
- specialized array slower than unspecialized?
- Prev by Date: Re: specialized array slower than unspecialized?
- Previous by thread: Re: specialized array slower than unspecialized?
- Next by thread: Does anybody used IBM DB2 as backend with clsql?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|