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

Re: Specification vs. Implementation

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 68 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 68 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On 8/26/05, Michael Sperber <sperber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > If you aren't using a systems-level language (or don't want to go through
> > the effort), then you have to base the lower-levels on an existing upper
> > level, which implies all text gets buffered twice.
> Well, sure, if you don't want to go to the effort, almost anything can
> be slow.  Sorry, but this kind of argument doesn't cut it with me.

And if you're not using a systems-level language?  Do we completely
scorn the Java implementations?

> Moreover, if you really want high performance, no ports layer of the
> kind described in the SRFI will do the job at all---only the primitive
> I/O can.

Yes, exactly.  But R5RS ports built on native ports can offer high performance.

> Can you show me how the C library does it?  I can't find it offhand.

See the O_DIRECT option to open(2).