scheme vs common lisp

[Chris Bitmead]

> * One strong point of CMUCL is the potential of its object
> represention scheme to perform well at basic list allocation and
> garbage collection. Do you know the memory allocation overhead for a
> basic cons object in RScheme, which is 8 bytes in CMUCL?  Just out of
> curiosity how does RScheme currently perform on a test of basic list
> allocation and garbage collection such as that below which completes
> in 16 seconds on CMUCL x86.
> 
> (defvar *a* nil)
> (defvar *b* nil)
> 
> (defun tst ()
>   (dotimes (i 20)
>     (declare (fixnum i))
>     (setf *b* nil)
>     (dotimes (j 500000)
>       (declare (fixnum j))
>       (push (+ i j 1.2345d0) *b*))))

I'd be happy to run this on RScheme if someone could convert it
to scheme.

Admittedly my lisp is rather poor compared to my Scheme, but the
above code doesn't make any sense to me.

-- 
Chris Bitmead
http://www.ans.com.au/~chrisb
mailto:chrisb@ans.com.au