From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: Speed, Faster... Faster... Slower?
Date: 2000/01/18
Message-ID: <3157208830761229@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 574354774
References: <18dae34d.4d4aa386@usw-ex0110-076.remarq.com> <lwaem37fe5.fsf@parades.rm.cnr.it> <yg11z7fh7zc.fsf@pc-arvidg.infotek.no> <lw4scb7b4h.fsf@parades.rm.cnr.it> <038c8397.85128a48@usw-ex0109-069.remarq.com> <3884915B.44BBB6C6@fisec.com> <040f1118.94ec5ed7@usw-ex0109-069.remarq.com>
mail-copies-to: never
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no
X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 948224954 27790 195.0.192.66 (18 Jan 2000 19:49:14 GMT)
Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879 or +1 510 435 8604; fax: +47 2210 9077; http://www.naggum.no
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) Emacs/20.5
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Jan 2000 19:49:14 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

* Tony <TonyNOToSPAM@chice.force9.co.uk.invalid>
| Some of the data is contained in simple-vectors, other bits
| in arrays, within the structures, but the use of arrays is
| wastefull in this situation as the ultimate size is unknown.

  well, you _could_ use adjustable vectors with fill pointers if such is
  your concern.  Common Lisp knows that the tradeoff that people made with
  lists carried a performance penalty.  look at VECTOR-PUSH and VECTOR-POP
  for ways to deal with unknown sizes and still get O(1) access times.

#:Erik