[plt-scheme] More PLT Scheme as an Alternative to Matlab

You give me more credit for forward thinking than I deserve. I was planning
on having array-set!. I'm not sure how to avoid it at the primitive level -
I just won't have enough information at the time I create the underlying
vectors to make them immutable (and there are no immutable SRFI vectors that
I'm aware of). Of course, that doesn't mean I have to expose the underlying
vectors or array-set! in the interface. That would make them logically
immutable, but not in a manner than helps the GC system, for example.

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Noel Welsh <noelwelsh at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 5:09 AM, Doug
> Williams<m.douglas.williams at gmail.com> wrote:
> > My hope would be that he we do some of this groundwork and get the
> semantics
> > right, you could try for grants to fund the compiler speedups.
>
> This is one hell of an interesting project. I noticed you have no
> array-set!, and I think this is good. I was going to write a long
> spiel about compiler technology, but if Matlab is fast enough with
> copy on write I'm sure Scheme will be.
>
> The current best example of a functional language w/ good numeric
> performance is SAC http://www.sac-home.org/  Stealing their array
> comprehensions (with loops) is probably a good idea. Alternatively the
> work in Haskell on nested data parallelism might provide some
> inspiration.
>
> N.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20090814/d32e3fa9/attachment.html>