[Ecls-list] Function type proclaimations not working?

[Jason Sewall]

On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Matthew Mondor
<mm_lists at pulsar-zone.net> wrote:
> Would it be possible to indicate what you expect different below?
>
>> /*    Compiler: ECL 13.4.1                                          */
>> /*    Date: 2013/5/16 16:00 (yyyy/mm/dd)                            */
>> /*    Machine: Linux 3.8.7-201.fc18.x86_64 x86_64                   */
>> /*    Source: var.lisp                                              */
>> #include <ecl/ecl-cmp.h>
>> #include "var.eclh"
>> /*    function definition for TAK                                   */
>> /*    optimize speed 3, debug 0, space 0, safety 0                  */
>> static cl_object L1tak(cl_object v1x, cl_object v2y, cl_object v3z)
>> {
>>  cl_object T0;
>>  const cl_env_ptr cl_env_copy = ecl_process_env();
>>  cl_object value0;
>>  cl_fixnum v4x;
>>  cl_fixnum v5y;
>>  cl_fixnum v6z;
>>  v4x = ecl_fixnum(v1x);
>>  v5y = ecl_fixnum(v2y);
>>  v6z = ecl_fixnum(v3z);
>> TTL:
>>  if ((v5y)<(v4x)) { goto L1; }
>>  value0 = ecl_make_fixnum(v6z);
>>  cl_env_copy->nvalues = 1;
>>  return value0;
>> L1:;
>>  {
>>   cl_fixnum v7;
>>   T0 = ecl_make_integer((v4x)-1);
>>   v7 = ecl_fixnum(L1tak(T0, ecl_make_fixnum(v5y), ecl_make_fixnum(v6z)));
>>   {
>>    cl_fixnum v8;
>>    T0 = ecl_make_integer((v5y)-1);
>>    v8 = ecl_fixnum(L1tak(T0, ecl_make_fixnum(v6z), ecl_make_fixnum(v4x)));
>>    T0 = ecl_make_integer((v6z)-1);
>>    v6z = ecl_fixnum(L1tak(T0, ecl_make_fixnum(v4x), ecl_make_fixnum(v5y)));
>>    v5y = v8;
>>    v4x = v7;
>>   }
>>  }
>>  goto TTL;
>> }
>
> Above I can see inline use of < rather than a generic comparison
> function call, as well as inline use of -1 instead of a generic
> substraction function call, along with the required conversions to
> fixnum...

Sorry for the missing context; the doc page I got the 'tak' example
from indicates that this is the sort of output you should expect:

   /*      local entry for function TAK                                  */
   static int LI1(register int V1,register int V2,register int V3)
   { VT3 VLEX3 CLSR3
   TTL:
   if (V2 < V1) {
   goto L2;}
   return(V3);
   L2:
   { int V5;
   V5 = LI1((V1)-1,V2,V3);
   { int V6;
   V6 = LI1((V2)-1,V3,V1);
   V3 = LI1((V3)-1,V1,V2);
   V2 = V6;
   V1 = V5;}}
   goto TTL;
   ;;; Note: Tail-recursive call of TAK was replaced by iteration.
   }

Note the signature of Ll1 and the lack of conversion functions. I am
simply interested to see how good the ECL compiler is compared to
hand-coding C, and type information is obviously a large part of that.

Cheers,
Jason