X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sbcglobal.net; s=s1024; t=1410231801; bh=QRh/Q/XVREsssgQ9nmHfApTB7PLycFdMcPIPVidmbo4=; h=Received:Received:Received:DKIM-Signature:X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer:From:Subject; b=HCf8ItxX5ubWONA5Z3FLC/LE8B+s/nEXbAV555u1IESocAYNdaVU0gZgxj7lBKNAjI0duHMJ7ES2W3vYrv8HtslR/MRfimmY99tvJssSrcPiJ5ouJrUiVdBxTu9PkNFspXNZ3C1rkq/ZfNbcksl0yTLo+UJpERVLcD51GM5wono=
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net;
	b=YPrJnpeAMEnvaTKsPGT2ysPFq5MH7ugqI9333AqJ4Gw9TsxcjNZjhWSIFVWIwkmvVPTGod1T4u/3qT6Ewa/f3raav/U8cQUWT0fRVataImrJwIxRTCacBF8ZfgEPvXDgZaXy1HXJEXZkngeFDlcNj3FcAhUTkTP+6lQYmVNMH38=;
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sbcglobal.net; s=s1024; t=1410231801; bh=QRh/Q/XVREsssgQ9nmHfApTB7PLycFdMcPIPVidmbo4=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer; b=hHraKTcxHbvWwcPAkvZeTyDI/OJ+cmccXuiGTO9RQRuPbybYja4TKyRne87ndqCxuUIC1DEKgRq6igZap3ZvvFO+b8lu9qRMDQ+8E/O2KA3teDMV/UV2Dbu/5oxppFiLyEwqnuSSgjbi+UTIXsZIJBze7YHPnrWrMgysxyVpQBU=
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:	695557 DOT 217 DOT bm AT smtp228 DOT mail DOT gq1 DOT yahoo DOT com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:	ymail-3
X-YMail-OSG:	_QQpWSkVM1ktx9Amyt0ymP5EPJJj8Z7Yx.IOtngNB025S1N
	Errc_jRFk1yLPGmqbBUbcLvZrvqzDt1g5lKO3nNXsDBirnPTUZqelPClWXsg
	.4YtQQVcscDUJU6MH9Zm47BcrNp0jAh.38QAfJLsi7qRFS.nH9w0ALAVUCKR
	nWuFH8bysRff3gSJJ5Iz1iGutn_bSePVpujs5V6kIw1EReKuiYBzRfWAt5_I
	rnXM2SBy8lOrtjjq3IThO9IxmQX3bzOV8nDCDxGsxb6lZYOPNONbsCcFtkBa
	FUCgRxa96lFcfq2WCPWBicSVuwKdi1OlBWjFiWCnIk5TYiTfaiMOpsTe7_9Q
	K0GuvXwHNhYvR4EgGmq9m_FMGcSg2705bDe8qMURSy44pj7q1wQCKTeI8yBV
	ILUsSNMUuW7z7kNnqDIQbavHRxHSu9AJgLX9X8spsRK7mEyDoCW50.Kjx4gA
	UV6tkhIN1rk2jhkW9_PS_YH1Lf1ztWfyn6WKbEHuc4IZ2lDWjkwM0EqdV8st
	n29MCO1GtntyuAGtvvsLTdRVnaUnhMjxpSdQ3ANi4hBNl51y4M6s-
X-Yahoo-SMTP:	b8jVkbOswBAqZ4BhECp7nxPJUfTGEnEGv_G4qgQeZMeAbA--
Mime-Version:	1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] A different kind of gschem nap
From:	Edward Hennessy <ehennes AT sbcglobal DOT net>
In-Reply-To:	<luirdo$uc0$1@ger.gmane.org>
Date:	Mon, 8 Sep 2014 20:03:19 -0700
Message-Id:	<6CB22DCB-2917-41B2-9606-267641BF7E52@sbcglobal.net>
References:	<luh5iq$42s$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org> <98C89E6D-3A1B-4E11-8F2A-F0C9D5D2AE7D AT sbcglobal DOT net> <luirdo$uc0$1 AT ger DOT gmane DOT org>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailer:	Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Sep 7, 2014, at 4:57 PM, Kai-Martin Knaak <kmk AT familieknaak DOT de> wrote:

> Edward Hennessy wrote:
> 
>> The function s_weakref_remove() is taking up a large percentage of
>> the execution time. (More than 85%) And, this function is called
>> from smob_free().
>> 
>> Using a faster container to store weak references could put us into
>> the 2-3 min range.
> 
> This still seems ridiculously inefficient to me. The algorithm jut 
> needs to assign about 100 refdes numbers that are not yet used. This 
> should not take minutes on a contemporary desktop. 

There is room for improvement. I don't have enough proficiency with
scheme to look into it. Hopefully, one of the developers proficient
with scheme will be able to.

Are other developers ok with moving this functionality into C as 
opposed to scheme?

Cheers,
Ed

- Raw text -