At 08:29 PM 2/14/2001 +0000, Graham Barr wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:04:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 05:57 PM 2/14/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
> > >Simon Cozens wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 11:38:58AM -0800, Damien Neil wrote:
> > > > > sub do_stuff { ... }
> > > > >
> > > > > {
> > > > > my $fh = IO::File->new("file");
> > > > > do_stuff($fh);
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > In this code, the compiler can determine that $fh has no active
> > > > > references at the end of the block
> > > >
> > > > No, it can't, but it can certainly put a *test* for not having
> references
> > > > there.
> >
> > Yes it can tell, actually--we do have the full bytecode to the sub
> > available to us, along with whatever metainfo we choose to remember
> > generally about the sub. Whether we use the info is a separate matter, of
> > course.
>
>Not if the sub is AUTOLOADed
Yeah, there is that. AUTOLOAD (and eval, and do, and require) throw a
high-entropy monkey wrench into things. Skipping them where possible will
be one of the tickets to more optimized code.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
