From: Harley Davis
Subject: Re: C is faster than lisp (lisp vs c++ / Rick Graham...)
Date: 
Message-ID: <DAVIS.94Aug24181329@passy.ilog.fr>
In article <··········@info-server.bbn.com> ·····@labs-n.bbn.com writes:

   In article <·················@arolla.idiap.ch> ···@arolla.idiap.ch (Thomas M. Breuel) writes:
   --> (think about how much space your
   --> typical "struct { int x; double y; char z;};" takes as a CommonLisp
   --> DEFSTRUCT)

   my guess is that it would be 128 bits. 4 words, expecting word-alignment
   behavior (well, that's machine-dependent stuff, I was thinking of a
   32-bit machine).

   sounds like you're suggesting that it comes out otherwise...

What about the accessor and constructor functions?  If you're using
CLOS, you probably also have extra overhead for slot descriptions,
class precedence list, etc.  I don't see how you get it down to only
128 bytes in a full CL.

-- Harley Davis





-- 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
motto: Use an integrated object-oriented dynamic language today.
       Write to ····@ilog.com and ask about Ilog Talk.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nom: Harley Davis			ILOG S.A.
net: ·····@ilog.fr			2 Avenue Galli�ni, BP 85
tel: +33 1 46 63 66 66			94253 Gentilly Cedex, France
From: Lawrence G. Mayka
Subject: Re: C is faster than lisp (lisp vs c++ / Rick Graham...)
Date: 
Message-ID: <LGM.94Aug28113902@polaris.ih.att.com>
In article <···················@passy.ilog.fr> ·····@ilog.fr (Harley Davis) writes:

   In article <··········@info-server.bbn.com> ·····@labs-n.bbn.com writes:

      In article <·················@arolla.idiap.ch> ···@arolla.idiap.ch (Thomas M. Breuel) writes:
      --> (think about how much space your
      --> typical "struct { int x; double y; char z;};" takes as a CommonLisp
      --> DEFSTRUCT)

      my guess is that it would be 128 bits. 4 words, expecting word-alignment
      behavior (well, that's machine-dependent stuff, I was thinking of a
      32-bit machine).

      sounds like you're suggesting that it comes out otherwise...

   What about the accessor and constructor functions?  If you're using
   CLOS, you probably also have extra overhead for slot descriptions,
   class precedence list, etc.  I don't see how you get it down to only
   128 bytes in a full CL.

I think people were referring to the per-instance cost, not to
additional per-class costs.
--
        Lawrence G. Mayka
        AT&T Bell Laboratories
        ···@ieain.att.com

Standard disclaimer.