[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: binary interface

From: Dirk Herrmann
Subject: Re: binary interface
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 11:57:20 +0100 (MET)

On Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Keisuke Nishida wrote:

> At Mon, 26 Feb 2001 12:27:25 +0100 (MET),
> Dirk Herrmann wrote:
> > 
> > BTW:  Now that a mechanism for writing objects binary exists, are there
> > yet any benchmark results telling us about the benefits with respect to
> > size and loading time?  If these are not significant, we should re-think
> > the idea of adding support for binary-writing, and instead take a look at
> > SRFI-10 as a means to store and read arbitrary data, potentially combined
> > with the (PROGN (SETF A (1 #1=(A B C))) (SETF B (2 #1#))) style for
> > denoting circular structures.  After all, adding the possibility to binary
> > read and write objects is a big change, and its usefulness still needs to
> > be proven.
> (Just a quick response.)  I want to load bytecode using mmap so that
> several processes can share the same memory.  Isn't it a good reason
> enough?

I don't understant that.  Why is sharing of memory dependent of the
question whether you choose a binary representation for storing?

Best regards,
Dirk Herrmann

reply via email to

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