[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] update: complex egg
From: |
Thomas Chust |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] update: complex egg |
Date: |
Wed, 13 Oct 2004 18:16:42 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20040918) |
Hello,
TiM wrote:
> greetings programs.
>
> i have a few questions about the complex egg.
>
> first, wouldn't it be slightly more efficient to represent a complex
> number as a length 2 vector?
I don't really know how this is implemented in CHICKEN, but in many
Schemes cons-cells are more time efficient than vectors or equally
efficient. And of course, the acces procedures take less time to type ;)
>
> secondly, don't we need some sort of type identifier to distinguish a
> complex number from a pair, or a length 2 vector?
>
> i'm thinking of something like ('complex . (a . b)) or ('complex .
#(a > b)).
It is not strictly necessary to have such a distinction, although it
would be a bit cleaner code.
It would probably be possible to make the complex data type a tinyclos
class for example or to use a custom record data type, as Felix
suggested. The main reason I did it the way it is implemented, is that I
wanted a high degree of portability across Scheme (and other Lisp
dialects) implementations.
>
> i would dearly like to see chicken have a complete numeric system. is
> it possible that this complex egg could be used to give chicken native
> (perhaps optional?) support for complex numbers?
It would be possible, but for native support of complex numbers I would
strongly suggest adding a new primitive data type to CHICKEN and using
the C library routines for modification of complex numbers internally,
because this would bring a huge performance gain compared to my native
Scheme implementation.
> [...]
cu,
Thomas
- [Chicken-users] update: complex egg, Thomas Chust, 2004/10/06
- Re: [Chicken-users] update: complex egg, Felix Winkelmann, 2004/10/11
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: [Chicken-users] update: complex egg, problems with SRFI-10 implementation, Thomas Chust, 2004/10/13
- Re: [Chicken-users] update: complex egg, problems with SRFI-10 implementation, felix winkelmann, 2004/10/14
- Re: [Chicken-users] problems with SRFI-10 implementation, Thomas Chust, 2004/10/15
- Re: [Chicken-users] problems with SRFI-10 implementation, felix winkelmann, 2004/10/18
- Re: [Chicken-users] update: complex egg,
Thomas Chust <=