[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gcl-devel] arrays

From: Vanuxem Grégory
Subject: Re: [Gcl-devel] arrays
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 13:42:42 +0200

Le dimanche 04 septembre 2005 à 23:38 -0400, Camm Maguire a écrit :
> Greetings!
> What is '(array nil) suposed to mean?
> I noticed that cmucl has support for 1 2 4 8 16 and 32bit array
> integers.  GCL has 1, 8, 16 and 32 (on 32bit machines).

Is it possible to send a 32 bits static array to cline ?

I have stopped my lapack implementation, since on my 64 bits machine,
arrays of int are array of long (8 bytes), and this will probably not
change in the future.



> 1) Is there any real benefit to 2 and 4 bit integer types, considering
>    the access overhead vs space tradeoff?
> 2) My understanding is that the simple (signed-byte
>    2^n),(unsigned-byte 2^n) strategy will not pass all Paul's tests,
>    as upgraded-array-element-type must preserve subtypep relationships
>    -- one needs at least (unsigned-byte 2^n-1), etc.
>    I.e. non-negative-char, signed-char, and (optionally) (unsigned
>    char) for each size type.  This is what I've implemented at
>    present, and I'm passing all relevant tests.  I'd obviously like to
>    support the minimum number of types possible, if for no other
>    reason than it slows down subtypep et. al. on (array *).
> Take care,

reply via email to

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