Re: [Chicken-users] numbers egg slow?

[Zbigniew]

You could use fx+ if you're guaranteed to be operating on fixnums. 
(You probably knew this already though)

On 9/29/05, Daishi Kato <address@hidden> wrote:
> Original Subject: wishlist: numbers egg (random) support
>
> At Wed, 28 Sep 2005 20:09:03 +0200,
> felix winkelmann wrote:
> >
> > That shouldn't be too hard - GMP provides all the neccessary
> > things. I'll give it a try.
>
> It would be nice to have.  Are there any other procedures
> that are not supported by numbers egg?
>
> BTW, I felt the use of numbers egg made the execution slow,
> even if it's just a fixnum calculation. Is is an expected feature?
>
> Following is a small test in chicken 2.2,
> but I'm not sure if it is correct to measure the performance.
>
> % csi -eval '(print (cpu-time))(let loop ([i 0]) (or (> i (expt 2 17)) (loop 
> (+ i 1))))(print (cpu-time))'
> 1
> 142
> % csi -eval '(use numbers)(print (cpu-time))(let loop ([i 0]) (or (> i (expt 
> 2 17)) (loop (+ i 1))))(print (cpu-time))'
> 1
> 1289
>
> Daishi
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chicken-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
>