On 05/21/2012 08:37 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote:
On 2012-05-21 21:10, David Christensen wrote:
Therefore, performance is first and clarity is second.
Would you not agree that these are pretty extreme cases to be making
such a wide-reaching decision on?
Please trim your replies.
No, I don't thi
On 2012-05-21 21:10, David Christensen wrote:
On 05/21/2012 12:40 PM, sono-io wrote:
David,
Are you saying that it would be faster to do:
my $this_date = shift;
my $output = shift;
as opposed to:
my ($this_date, $output) = @_;
or am I not reading your assessment correctly?
1. Benchmarking on t
On 21/05/2012 21:12, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is faster than
another, wouldn't it be better to
On 05/21/2012 12:40 PM, sono-io wrote:
David,
Are you saying that it would be faster to do:
my $this_date = shift;
my $output = shift;
as opposed to:
my ($this_date, $output) = @_;
or am I not reading your assessment correctly?
1. Benchmarking on the target (production)
> For one thing, there is the "Lies, Damned Lies and Benchmarks" factor
I must have missed the e-mail that said "DOG PILE!!!". =;)
Thanks to everyone for the explanations - all good food for thought.
That's why I'm here.
Marc
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscr...@pe
On 05/21/2012 03:12 PM, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is faster than another,
wouldn't it
On 2012-05-21 14:51, Shawn H Corey wrote:
On 12-05-21 04:32 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote:
On 2012-05-21 14:12, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm cur
On 12-05-21 04:32 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote:
On 2012-05-21 14:12, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is
On 2012-05-21 14:12, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is faster than another,
wouldn't it be
On 2012-05-21 13:40, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
On May 20, 2012, at 10:07 PM, David Christensen wrote:
I've updated function_arguments.pl with Benchmark, below. f_direct() is the
fastest, f_shift() is in the middle (12% slower), and f_assign() is the slowest
(37%).
David,
Are you
Hi Paul,
> Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
> too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is faster than another,
wouldn't it be better to do it that way, as long as it doesn't c
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 12:40:15PM -0700, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
> On May 20, 2012, at 10:07 PM, David Christensen wrote:
>
> > I've updated function_arguments.pl with Benchmark, below. f_direct() is the
> > fastest, f_shift() is in the middle (12% slower), and f_assign() is the
> > slowes
On May 20, 2012, at 10:07 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> I've updated function_arguments.pl with Benchmark, below. f_direct() is the
> fastest, f_shift() is in the middle (12% slower), and f_assign() is the
> slowest (37%).
David,
Are you saying that it would be faster to do:
my $this
On 12-05-21 01:07 AM, David Christensen wrote:
That's what I thought, until I started writing subroutines that modified
@_ and stomped on the the caller's variables.
Yes, that's what it does. That's why it's recommended to copy the values
to my variables inside the subroutine.
--
Just my 0.
On 05/20/2012 03:28 PM, Shawn H Corey wrote:
On 12-05-20 06:15 PM, David Christensen wrote:
If your subroutine needs to know how many arguments were passed, the
former style (assignment) makes this trivial. Once @_ has been shifted
(latter style), I don't know an easy way to determine if zero or
On 12-05-20 06:15 PM, David Christensen wrote:
If your subroutine needs to know how many arguments were passed, the
former style (assignment) makes this trivial. Once @_ has been shifted
(latter style), I don't know an easy way to determine if zero or one
argument was passed (stack crawling?).
On 05/20/2012 08:09 AM, sono-io wrote:
Are there any differences between these two idioms if only one or zero
arguments are passed to them?
my ($mode) = @_;
my $mode = shift;
If your subroutine needs to know how many arguments were passed, the
former style (assignment) makes this tri
On 20/05/2012 16:16, John SJ Anderson wrote:
On Sunday, May 20, 2012 at 11:09 AM, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Are there any differences between these two idioms if only one or
zero arguments are passed to them?
my ($mode) = @_;
my $mode = shift;
If so, why would you chose one over the other
On Sunday, May 20, 2012 at 11:09 AM, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
> Are there any differences between these two idioms if only one or zero
> arguments are passed to them?
>
> my ($mode) = @_;
>
> my $mode = shift;
>
> If so, why would you chose one over the other?
>
> It seems to me that they
19 matches
Mail list logo
