No, I totally disagree on that if I do that we will lose the speed gained before, I still don't know why we can't stay we the actual dispatch method when tracing, etc and use computed goto when running without any command line switch?
Daniel Grunblatt. On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Brent Dax wrote: > Daniel Grunblatt: > # On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Brent Dax wrote: > # > # > Michael Fischer: > # > # On Nov 04, Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> took up a keyboard > # > # and banged out > # > # > Michael Fischer: > # > # > # In the goto case, we spin. And perhaps I am broken there. End > # > # > # really wants to return, not just set the pc, but I > # hadn't thought > # > # > # of a clever way to do that corner case, and wanted to see what > # > # > # the behavior would be without it. I suspect I need it. > # > # > > # > # > Can't you just break()? > # > # > # > # Out of a function? > # > > # > Isn't the win in computed goto that you inline the sub > # bodies and can > # > loop implicitly instead of explicitly, thus saving a jump or two? > # > # Exactly, that's why I suggested not to use computed goto when tracing, > # checking bounds or profiling, there is no way , I think, to > # use it without > # loosing speed. > > When you implement bounds, tracing, or profiling, you *will* lose speed > in *any* system. In this case, you can do these things by inserting the > appropriate checks just before the goto. > > --Brent Dax > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Configure pumpking for Perl 6 > > When I take action, I'm not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 > empty tent and hit a camel in the butt. > --Dubya > >
