[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#68244: hash-table improvements
From: |
Mattias Engdegård |
Subject: |
bug#68244: hash-table improvements |
Date: |
Thu, 8 Feb 2024 15:42:45 +0100 |
8 feb. 2024 kl. 15.19 skrev Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>:
> For me, the more important aspect of obarrays is that we should have
> a separate obarray type
Oh yes. This is necessary for automatic growth if nothing else.
> Of course, we'd still have to *also* accept plain vectors, sadly.
In some contexts such as `try-complete` perhaps, but I don't think we're
saddled with it forever in places that actually use an obarray (like `intern`).
> we can do something much simpler: vectors are accepted by
> simply storing in the first field a reference to the actual obarray
> object, so there's no need to play any games and/or share representation
> between vectors and obarray.
Why is that simpler than having `intern` accept both obarray objects and plain
vectors, during a transitional period?
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Mattias Engdegård, 2024/02/08
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Stefan Monnier, 2024/02/08
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/02/08
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements,
Mattias Engdegård <=
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Stefan Monnier, 2024/02/08
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Mattias Engdegård, 2024/02/08
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Stefan Monnier, 2024/02/08
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Mattias Engdegård, 2024/02/12
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Stefan Monnier, 2024/02/12
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/02/13
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Mattias Engdegård, 2024/02/13
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Gerd Möllmann, 2024/02/13
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Stefan Monnier, 2024/02/13
- bug#68244: hash-table improvements, Mattias Engdegård, 2024/02/14