Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rice!news!gateley From: gateley@rice.edu (John Gateley) Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Subject: Re: Scheme optimization (was Re: Is this the end of the lisp wave?) Message-ID: Date: 17 Jan 91 22:26:28 GMT References: <5569@turquoise.UUCP> <3954@skye.ed.ac.uk> <20544@yunexus.YorkU.CA> <1991Jan17.054800.9036@Think.COM> <20598@yunexus.YorkU.CA> Sender: news@rice.edu (News) Organization: Rice University Lines: 23 In-Reply-To: oz@yunexus.yorku.ca's message of 17 Jan 91 16:15:55 GMT In article <20598@yunexus.YorkU.CA> oz@yunexus.yorku.ca (Ozan Yigit) writes: In article <1991Jan17.054800.9036@Think.COM> barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin) writes: >Common Lisp >optimizations are geared towards removing some of the overhead of dynamic >typing ... Ah, I see what he means by optimization tricks now. I presume it can pay off for scheme compilers as well Yes it can, having worked on a type inferencer used for both Scheme and Common Lisp. The main difference is that Common Lisp declares provide hints to the inferencer (inferrer?) in a concise form, while Scheme has no such mechanism. John gateley@rice.edu -- "...Yes, I've got some questions that are guaranteed to shake you up. How much marriage urges a windmill to paint infinity? Is a magic hide-a-bed the vile home of spanish fire? Is firm corn merrier under gifts of less important love? We wonder ..." The Residents