On Thu, Mar 18, 2004 at 05:25:00PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 12:41:20PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: > : Currently I'm figuring on just nuking the whole cache in any of these
: > : cases. Later on we can consider doing Clever
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 12:41:20PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> : Currently I'm figuring on just nuking the whole cache in any of these
> : cases. Later on we can consider doing Clever Things, if it seems
> : worthwhile.
>
> That's what Perl 5 does, FWIW.
Don't forget about cache invalidation on dynamic method redefinition.
--
Mark Biggar
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Okay, so it's method cache time.
>
> First important note: I've never done this before (I think my
> antipathy towards objects might've given everyone just the tiniest
> clue :) so pointers
On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 12:41:20PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
: Currently I'm figuring on just nuking the whole cache in any of these
: cases. Later on we can consider doing Clever Things, if it seems
: worthwhile.
That's what Perl 5 does, FWIW. But you're caching scheme seems way
too complicat
At 5:31 PM + 3/17/04, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote in perl.perl6.internals :
This seems... too simple, so I'm sure I'm missing something besides
the potential massive memory usage. So, by all means, have at it.
You'll need to worry about actions that invalidate all or part o
Dan Sugalski wrote in perl.perl6.internals :
>
> This seems... too simple, so I'm sure I'm missing something besides
> the potential massive memory usage. So, by all means, have at it.
You'll need to worry about actions that invalidate all or part of the
method cache : introduction of a new clas
