Subject: Re: #'sizeof operator? From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no> Date: 1999/01/11 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <3125074065418253@naggum.no> * Nick Levine <nick@harlequin.co.uk> | Ugh, looks like hard work. sure. SIZE-OF should be hard work. we don't want to encourage people to do simple stuff like (time (make-string n)) for increasing values of N when what they are doing is entirely wrong to begin with. optimizing bad behavior is not a good idea. moreover, I'm sure he's happier trusting machine addresses than the output from the TIME macro. incidentally, TIME reports 32 other bytes too many in Allegro CL unless tuned with (setq excl::time-other-base 32) (thanks to Duane Rettig <duane@franz.com> for this tidbit.) #:Erik