ASPN ActiveState Programmer Network
ActiveState
/ Home / Perl / PHP / Python / Tcl / XSLT /
/ Safari / My ASPN /
Cookbooks | Documentation | Mailing Lists | Modules | News Feeds | Products | User Groups


Recent Messages
List Archives
About the List
List Leaders
Subscription Options

View Subscriptions
Help

View by Topic
ActiveState
.NET Framework
Open Source
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl
Web Services
XML & XSLT

View by Category
Database
General
SOAP
System Administration
Tools
User Interfaces
Web Programming
XML Programming


MyASPN >> Mail Archive >> tcl-core
tcl-core
Re: [TCLCORE] Tcl-Core Digest, Vol 23, Issue 35
by Twylite other posts by this author
Apr 29 2008 2:33PM messages near this date
Re: [TCLCORE] Installation changes for Tcl 8.6 | Re: [TCLCORE] Tcl-Core Digest, Vol 23, Issue 35
> 
>  From: "Alexandre Ferrieux" <alexandre.ferrieux@[...].com>
>  Subject: Re: [TCLCORE] [SPAM] [6.0] Re: base64 in the core?
>    
>  Now this part is clarified, may I ask about the strength of the motivation ?
>  Are there compelling examples of a need for [string foreach] except
>  for toy Huffmann encoders, toy base64-again, or even toy-parsers ?
>  Greased lightning for toys ?
> 
>  -Alex
>    
Why toy?  I understand your suggestion that all of these examples are 
"toys" to mean that you would consider a Tcl implementation of any of 
this functionality to be a "toy", further implying that a "real" 
implementation would be in C as an extension.

What about those of us that use Tcl as a fully functional language and 
don't intend to drop to C every time we need to do something that 
vaguely resembles byte- or number-crunching in a reasonable period of time?

For example many of the crypto primitives implemented in pure Tcl are 
around two orders of magnitude slower than a C equivalent, making them 
unusable in many applications.  To sign a mail with 1Mb attachment in 
pure Tcl takes 16s for the SHA1 alone.  Improving that by one order of 
magnitude - which a function like "string foreach" may be able to do - 
would make SHA1 usable for real-world applications.  Bignum support has 
already brought pure-Tcl RSA performance to around 50% that of C (basic 
square-and-multiply algorithm) showing that a bit of framework support 
can make all the difference.

I like Donal's suggestion of a scripted mock-up - I've already started 
looking at it and noticed that some algorithms favour a character 
representation for the iteration variable while others favour an int - 
an immediate API complication.

Regards,
Trevor


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Tcl-Core mailing list
Tcl-Core@[...].net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tcl-core
Thread:
Twylite
Alexandre Ferrieux

Privacy Policy | Email Opt-out | Feedback | Syndication
© 2004 ActiveState, a division of Sophos All rights reserved