Vladimir Lipskiy wrote:
The current implementation of find_lex (by_name) is suboptimal. A linear
scan over the list of lexical names is performed
(s. sub.c:lexicals_get_position()).
A better way would be to provide a list of lexicals plus a name hash,
where hash values are indices into the list.
W
> The current implementation of find_lex (by_name) is suboptimal. A linear
> scan over the list of lexical names is performed
> (s. sub.c:lexicals_get_position()).
>
> A better way would be to provide a list of lexicals plus a name hash,
> where hash values are indices into the list.
What would be
The current implementation of find_lex (by_name) is suboptimal. A linear
scan over the list of lexical names is performed
(s. sub.c:lexicals_get_position()).
A better way would be to provide a list of lexicals plus a name hash,
where hash values are indices into the list.
As such a functionality
Leo~
Why not just use a hash and ditch the array then?
Matt
Leopold Toetsch wrote:
The current implementation of find_lex (by_name) is suboptimal. A linear
scan over the list of lexical names is performed
(s. sub.c:lexicals_get_position()).
A better way would be to provide a list of lexicals p
Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Leo~
> Why not just use a hash and ditch the array then?
Because $HL may emit code to access lexicals by numeric index.
> Matt
leo
