sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Eric Sesterhenn <SnakeByte AT gmx.de>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery functions in C
- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2003 16:29:12 +0200 (MEST)
Hi,
sorrow and I where thinking about reimplementing some slow sorcery functions
in C, by starting replacing slow stuff from /var/lib/sorcery/modules with a
wrapper like
"function oldfunc () { spellbook oldfunc; }"
where "spellbook" would be a compiled binary, thus getting some speed into
this stuff. We would also volunteer in doing this. The idea is not to replace
the entire scripts with a binary but just some slow stuff. We got to this
idea, when sorrow implemented a "gaze size" and xiticix's python example was
much faster than the bash implementation, but I think forcing everybody to use
python is not a good idea, so what do you think about this idea?
cu Eric/snakebyte
--
www.snake-basket.de - just my site
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++
Bitte lächeln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!
-
[SM-Discuss] Sorcery functions in C,
Eric Sesterhenn, 06/28/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery functions in C, Belxjander, 06/28/2003
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Sorcery functions in C, Dufflebunk, 06/28/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.