Whats' the proper senario of par-map? (Was Re: bug#13188: par-map causes VM stack overflow)

[Nala Ginrut]

On Wed, 2013-03-27 at 18:12 +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Nala Ginrut <address@hidden> skribis:
> 
> > scheme@(guile-user)> (par-map 1+ (iota 10000))
> > While executing meta-command:
> > ERROR: Throw to key `vm-error' with args `(vm-run "VM: Stack
> > overflow" ())'.
> 
> Commit 8a177d3 fixes this.  I added a paragraph in the documentation
> that explains what happens: delimited continuations to the rescue once
> again!  ;-)
> 
> Comments welcome.
> 

oh~I love delimited continuations!

But I'm still puzzled with the performance of par-map:
--------------------cut-------------------
scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (define a (map (lambda (x) (expt x 5)) (iota
10000)))
;; 0.008019s real time, 0.007979s run time.  0.000000s spent in GC.
scheme@(guile-user)> ,time (define a (par-map (lambda (x) (expt x 5))
(iota 10000)))
;; 6.596471s real time, 6.579375s run time.  1.513880s spent in GC.
--------------------end-------------------

So my question is, what's the proper scenario to use par-map?



> Ludo’.