[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "simplifications"
From: |
Juanma Barranquero |
Subject: |
Re: "simplifications" |
Date: |
Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:02:16 +0100 |
Two additional comments, BTW:
> Could people, before introducing such "optimizations", check the
> bytecode?
I didn't write "optimization" anywhere in the ChangeLog, because I was
not worried about optimization.
If you're gonna revert the change, perhaps you'll want also revert the
one to ring-member. My version, with catch, is a lot cleaner IMO, but
in my extremely informal tests (which I did before commiting) it was
about 1,5% slower. I had to go to the hundreds of thousands of
ring-member invocations to see the difference, but perhaps that's very
significant for you.
Juanma
- Re: "simplifications", (continued)
- Re: "simplifications", David Kastrup, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", Juanma Barranquero, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", Richard Stallman, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", Stefan Monnier, 2007/11/20
- Re: "simplifications", Stephen J. Turnbull, 2007/11/21
- Re: "simplifications", David Kastrup, 2007/11/21
- Re: "simplifications", Stephen J. Turnbull, 2007/11/21
Re: "simplifications",
Juanma Barranquero <=
Re: "simplifications", Miles Bader, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", David Kastrup, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", Juanma Barranquero, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", David Kastrup, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", Juanma Barranquero, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", David Kastrup, 2007/11/19
- Re: "simplifications", Juanma Barranquero, 2007/11/19
Re: "simplifications", Richard Stallman, 2007/11/19