[plt-scheme] Profiling Contracts

You can turn (struct name ...) in to (struct-out name) these days, and
be mostly right.

I can say this much for sure: if there is no 'provide/contract' in
your program (and no define/contract, with-contract, or just contract)
then there is no contract checking....

Robby

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Paulo J. Matos<pocmatos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Dave Herman<dherman at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>> You can write your own wrapper:
>>
>> #lang scheme/base
>>
>> (require scheme/contract)
>> (provide provide/contract*)
>>
>> (define-syntax provide/contract*
>>  (syntax-rules ()
>>    [(_ #:disable [name contract] ...)
>>     (provide name ...)]
>>    [(_ . rest)
>>     (provide/contract . rest)]))
>>
>
> Hummm, Thanks. I indeed thought about something along these lines but
> I would prefer something from 'certified' robby since there are cases
> where provide/contract doesn't receive a [name contract] but instead
> [struct name ...] for example which would render this not very useful
> except for the most basic of contracts. I would like to be sure that
> if I use something like this that it is general for all kinds of
> provide/contract constructs and does exactly what it is supposed to do
> when the contracts and enabled or disabled. I might try to generalize
> if I get to that point. Either way, thank you very much for the
> starting point!
>
>> Dave
>>
>> Paulo J. Matos wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 2:13 AM, Robby
>>> Findler<robby at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I would just run the profiler to find out what I find out.
>>>>
>>>> But you can always just disable the contracts (define provide/contract
>>>> to be just provide, after stripping out the contracts) and then see
>>>> that way.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's still some rewriting...
>>>  It would be nice if it were possible to send a flag to
>>> provide/contract, such that if it is #t, contracts would not be
>>> applied at all and provide/contract would behave as provide.
>>>
>>>> Robby
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 5:30 PM, Paulo J. Matos<pocmatos at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a way to profile the time taken checking contracts?
>>>>> I have used contracts heavily in some parts of my model checker, many
>>>>> times checking things that are more than simple type checks... and would
>>>>> like to know if there is an easy way to know, 'hey for this exection, 5%
>>>>> of the time was spent checking contracts'. If there is nothing
>>>>> implemented to do this, are there any guidelines on how to find an
>>>>> approximation of this value?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Paulo Matos
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________________________________________
>>>>>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>>>>>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Paulo Jorge Matos - pocmatos at gmail.com
> http://www.pmatos.net
>