[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: shared-text substrings

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 13 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 13 are here. Eventually, the entire history will be moved there, including any new messages.



Michael Sperber:
>I just doubt it's worth the tradeoff.  Is there hard data that the
>optimizations you envision actually give significant performance
>gains?  I've always found non-shared strings plenty fast.

I know it's not hard scientific evidence, but at the company I currently
work for, we have a Scheme-based engine generating web pages, which uses
string-append in a fairly naive but straightforward way. It was way too
slow, and that slowness was largely accounted for by time taken up in
string-append. I implemented string-append/shared, switched code to use it
instead of normal string-append, and got something like a 100x speed
improvement, just from that change. Note that the obvious way to have made
the code in question use strings in a less naive way would have basically
been to implement the equivalent of string-append/shared, but at a higher
level.

-dan