(vector t &key (:start t) (:end t))
*
:node node)
- (let* ((element-ctype (extract-upgraded-element-type seq))
+ (let* ((type (lvar-type seq))
+ (element-ctype (array-type-upgraded-element-type type))
(element-type (type-specifier element-ctype))
- (type (lvar-type seq))
(saetp (unless (eq *wild-type* element-ctype)
(find-saetp-by-ctype element-ctype))))
(cond ((eq *wild-type* element-ctype)
(end1 (or end1 len1))
(end2 (or end2 len2))
(replace-len (min (- end1 start1) (- end2 start2))))
- ,(unless (policy node (= safety 0))
+ ,(unless (policy node (= insert-array-bounds-checks 0))
`(progn
(unless (<= 0 start1 end1 len1)
(sequence-bounding-indices-bad-error seq1 start1 end1))
;;; Only handle the simple result type cases. If somebody does (CONCATENATE
;;; '(STRING 6) ...) their code won't be optimized, but nobody does that in
;;; practice.
+;;;
+;;; Limit full open coding based on length of constant sequences. Default
+;;; value is chosen so that other parts of to compiler (constraint propagation
+;;; mainly) won't go nonlinear too badly. It's not an exact number -- but
+;;; in the right ballpark.
+(defvar *concatenate-open-code-limit* 129)
+
(deftransform concatenate ((result-type &rest lvars)
((constant-arg
(member string simple-string base-string simple-base-string))
`(apply
(lambda ,vars
(declare (ignorable ,@vars))
+ (declare (optimize (insert-array-bounds-checks 0)))
(let* ((.length. (+ ,@lengths))
(.pos. 0)
(.string. (make-string .length. :element-type ',element-type)))
(muffle-conditions compiler-note))
,@(loop for value in lvar-values
for var in vars
- collect (if (stringp value)
+ collect (if (and (stringp value)
+ (< (length value) *concatenate-open-code-limit*))
;; Fold the array reads for constant arguments
`(progn
,@(loop for c across value
- collect `(setf (aref .string.
- .pos.) ,c)
- collect `(incf .pos.)))
+ for i from 0
+ collect
+ ;; Without truly-the we get massive numbers
+ ;; of pointless error traps.
+ `(setf (aref .string.
+ (truly-the index (+ .pos. ,i)))
+ ,c))
+ (incf .pos. ,(length value)))
`(sb!impl::string-dispatch
(#!+sb-unicode
(simple-array character (*))
*
:policy (> speed space))
"expand inline"
- `(let ((index 0)
- (find nil)
+ `(let ((find nil)
(position nil))
- (declare (type index index))
- (dolist (i sequence
- (if (and end (> end index))
- (sequence-bounding-indices-bad-error
- sequence start end)
- (values find position)))
- (when (and end (>= index end))
- (return (values find position)))
- (when (>= index start)
- (let ((key-i (funcall key i)))
- (,',condition (funcall predicate key-i)
- ;; This hack of dealing with non-NIL
- ;; FROM-END for list data by iterating
- ;; forward through the list and keeping
- ;; track of the last time we found a
- ;; match might be more screwy than what
- ;; the user expects, but it seems to be
- ;; allowed by the ANSI standard. (And
- ;; if the user is screwy enough to ask
- ;; for FROM-END behavior on list data,
- ;; turnabout is fair play.)
- ;;
- ;; It's also not enormously efficient,
- ;; calling PREDICATE and KEY more often
- ;; than necessary; but all the
- ;; alternatives seem to have their own
- ;; efficiency problems.
- (if from-end
- (setf find i
- position index)
- (return (values i index))))))
- (incf index))))))
+ (flet ((bounds-error ()
+ (sequence-bounding-indices-bad-error sequence start end)))
+ (if (and end (> start end))
+ (bounds-error)
+ (do ((slow sequence (cdr slow))
+ (fast (cdr sequence) (cddr fast))
+ (index 0 (+ index 1)))
+ ((cond ((null slow)
+ (if (and end (> end index))
+ (bounds-error)
+ (return (values find position))))
+ ((and end (>= index end))
+ (return (values find position)))
+ ((eq slow fast)
+ (circular-list-error sequence)))
+ (bug "never"))
+ (declare (list slow fast))
+ (when (>= index start)
+ (let* ((element (car slow))
+ (key-i (funcall key element)))
+ (,',condition (funcall predicate key-i)
+ ;; This hack of dealing with non-NIL
+ ;; FROM-END for list data by iterating
+ ;; forward through the list and keeping
+ ;; track of the last time we found a
+ ;; match might be more screwy than what
+ ;; the user expects, but it seems to be
+ ;; allowed by the ANSI standard. (And
+ ;; if the user is screwy enough to ask
+ ;; for FROM-END behavior on list data,
+ ;; turnabout is fair play.)
+ ;;
+ ;; It's also not enormously efficient,
+ ;; calling PREDICATE and KEY more often
+ ;; than necessary; but all the
+ ;; alternatives seem to have their own
+ ;; efficiency problems.
+ (if from-end
+ (setf find element
+ position index)
+ (return (values element index)))))))))))))
(def %find-position-if when)
(def %find-position-if-not unless))
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff