Re: Changing the Emacs engine to Guile

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> writes:

>> this (while (re-search-forward  ...)) loop modifies the line for each
>> occurence of the regexp, replacing it with (substring substitute-str 0
>> match-length), which is a different replacement string in general.
>
> Why? I would think the replacement string is the same. (When using
> single byte characters.)

With:

substitute-str = "Abcdef" ; initally
start-match    =  4
end-match      = 12
match-length   =  8


substitute-str will become "AbcdefAbcdef",
and   (substring substitute-str 0 match-length)        = "AbcdefAb"
while (substring substitute-str start-match end-match) = "efAbcdef"


>> I don't know about the other implementations, but with clisp you could
>> also try to use the -C option to have your script compiled before
>> running it.  On big files it might be worthwhile to spend some time
>> compiling the script.
>
> In my script I have:
>     exec clisp -C "$0" "$@" 
>
> That is not correct?

Oh yes. Sorry I overlooked that -C.  
So the script is compiled and it should run fast on big input.



>> But my point here is that in emacs, most code is compiled or byte
>> compiled, therefore you should compare the speed of the code generated
>> by sbcl vs. guile.  Benchmarking is hard.
>
> As I understood it Guile compiles before executing. That is not correct?
>
> Well, if the big time difference is nothing to worry about, I'll keep
> still. ;-}
>
> For the moment being I still prefer Emacs Lisp for scripting above
> Guile. ;-]
>
> -- 
> Cecil Westerhof
> Senior Software Engineer
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/