Greetings!
Raymond Toy <raymond.toy@ericsson.com> writes:
> >>>>> "Wolfgang" == Wolfgang Jenkner <wjenkner@inode.at> writes:
>
> Wolfgang> In mopers.lisp MUL* and MUL are given compiler-macro definitions via
> Wolfgang> DEFOPT. In particular, if we have exactly two arguments, MUL* is
> Wolfgang> transformed to the broken MUL2* from opers.lisp. In 5.9.0 DEFOPT
> Wolfgang> itself had a bogus definition and did nothing (see defopt.lisp), so
> Wolfgang> for MUL* the definition in runtim.lisp was used.
>
> These kinds of issues make me wonder if we really need the
> compiler-macros, and other macros that could really be functions.
> They may have been important long ago when computers were 2 or 3
> orders of magnitude slower than today, but seem less important now.
>
IMHO, an argument can be made to not chase after performance if the
cost is too high in terms of time and/or complexity, though no matter
how fast computers are, what humans want to do with them grows at
least as fast. But when someone has gone through the work already to
deliver the performance, I'd be very reluctant to throw it away.
Take care,
> Ray
>
>
>
>
>
--
Camm Maguire camm@enhanced.com
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah