Re: [Chicken-users] Nursery sizing considered stupid

[John Cowan]

Brandon J. Van Every scripsit:

> "J'accuse!"  It is of course open source, which implies open 
> responsibility.  What level of responsibility are you personally willing 
> to take about this problem?  You willing to figure out what's good or 
> bad about nsample?  I'm willing to implement a better stack-size.cmake 
> script, and I'm doing that tonight.  But I'm not willing to dig into 
> nsample or revamp it.  

Since I believe that the whole idea of figuring out the correct nursery
size by measuring raw code speed is fundamentally flawed, it follows that
I don't believe that tweaking the use of nsample will help, *and* I don't
believe that changing nsample to do something different will help either.

My proposal is the same as it was in my original message, and is simple.
Forget the variable-size nursery altogether and go with 128K, period.
Make this tweakable in the configuration file, and for anything else,
people can use -:s.  You're already halfway there.

-- 
BALIN FUNDINUL          UZBAD KHAZADDUMU        address@hidden
BALIN SON OF FUNDIN     LORD OF KHAZAD-DUM      http://www.ccil.org/~cowan