9:39:02beachheisig: How do you estimate the cost of testing the keyword parameters of a sequence function, compared to the generic dispatch for the class of the sequence?
9:39:25beachI remember you had some idea about the keyword parameters, but I don't remember what it was.
9:40:03beachIt seems to me a good idea to have compiler macros for that kind of stuff, but I realize that a compiler macro is hard to write for those cases. But perhaps it could be automated.
9:40:28heisigI don't know yet, I haven't managed to write that section of my paper so far.
9:40:40heisigBut I made excellent progress all in all.
9:41:21heisigLet me reiterate the idea of speeding up the keyword parsing:
9:43:42beachOK, so presumably the compiler could then simplify the tests involving the keyword parameters. Is that the idea?
9:43:56heisigYes, the trick is to inline only the keyword parsing step, and to automatically generate a second effective method with mandatory arguments only.
9:45:04heisigThe important part is that everything is automated. No way for us humans to screw up more than once :)
9:46:35heisigOf course there are limitations. If the sequence argument of FIND has no known type, there will just be a regular call to a generic function.
9:47:31heisigBut that is the price to pay for the ability to add new methods with new keywords at any time.