Re: unsigned 64 bit integers patch

Thanks for investigating the 'whys' of integer conversion.

The changes in that branch work for me;  I would however appreciate it
if you would change my name from 'Aaron Burrows' to 'Aaron Burrow' (no
trailing ess) in the CONTRIBUTORS file.

Thanks,
Aaron

On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Russ Tyndall <[email protected]> wrote:
> Please review the changes in this branch:
> https://github.com/UnwashedMeme/clsql/tree/sqlite3-ai-and-fix-atol64 and
> check that they work for you. No more tests are failing than previously so I
> think this is probably good to be merged into master and pushed upstream.
>
> Cheers,
> Russ Tyndall
> Acceleration.net
>
>
> On 1/7/2014 1:53 PM, Russ Tyndall wrote:
>
> On 1/6/2014 11:49 PM, Aaron Burrow wrote:
>
> Why do you not use parse-integer(...) ?
>
> After some quick tests, using the C functions allows us not to bring the
> C-string into lisp and thus uses about 50% of the memory of a
> parse-integer approach.  I tested using sqlite3, querying a table of
> 1.8M 64bit ints.  The C approach also uses a little less processing power.
>
> Cheers,
> Russ Tyndall
> Acceleration.net
> _______________________________________________
> CLSQL mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clsql
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CLSQL mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clsql
>