[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Re: Re: [Chicken-users] performance issue in xml-rpc

From: Daishi Kato
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [Chicken-users] performance issue in xml-rpc
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:34:22 +0900

On 12/15/06, felix winkelmann <address@hidden> wrote:
On 12/15/06, Daishi Kato <address@hidden> wrote:
> I'm still waiting for a comment from felix about read-line not using
> read-string.

Sorry, I know I'm too slow.

read-line can't directly use read-string unless I introduce some buffering,
so this is not exactly trivial to do in the context of chicken's I/O system.
Please give some time.

Are you going to add unread-string in port class? Or exposing the buffer?

> In the meanwhile, I'm fixing the ssax egg to use ##sys#read-char-0
> like the following.
> Index: ssax-core.scm
> ===================================================================
> --- ssax-core.scm       (revision 2646)
> +++ ssax-core.scm       (working copy)
> @@ -804,6 +804,10 @@
>     (gambitize (eof-object? port))
>     ;(gambitize (string-append a b))
>     )
> + (chicken
> +   (define-macro (read-char port) `(##sys#read-char-0 ,port))
> +   (define-macro (peek-char port) `(##sys#peek-char-0 ,port))
> +   )
>   (else #t))
> How's this?

Does this improve performace? And: Can you assure thar the arguments
are really ports? (otherwise you'll get crashes).

The performance is improved just a little bit, but better than nothing.
The arguments are always ports, and code for Gambit has the same syntax.
And,I got no error with my simple xml-rpc test.
I can commit the patch if you or anyone responsible wants.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]