Hello,
In order to measure function call performance I am using simple and dumb
fibonacci numbers calculation. It is equivalent to the PIR example in
examples/benchmark/fib.pir
The perl6 code is :
use v6;
sub fib ($n){
return $n if $n<2;
return fib($n-1)+fib($n-2);
}
say fib(22);
H
Will Coleda wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:53 AM, luben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have noticed that Rakudo (and NQP) generates different PIR code for
implicit and explicit returns.
Example for implicit return:
sub foo($n){
$n;
}
And example for explicit return:
sub foo($n){
return
Will Coleda wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 10:53 AM, luben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is this on purpose? The implicit return is 4-5 times faster than explicit
return.
Best regards
luben
CC'ing perl6-compiler (where rakudo-particular items should go), and
wondering if you can attach the gene
Jeff Horwitz wrote:
the implicit return is by definition always at the end of a sub and
therefore emits a PIR .return(). it's fast and easy.
the explicit return, in contrast, could be anywhere in a subroutine,
including loops, closures, etc. these constructs are also implemented
using parro
Ovid wrote:
That works just fine, so I know we have types on signatures. But now
this fails:
# remove the 'Int' and this works
sub fact (Int $n) {
if 0 == $n {
return 1;
}
else {
return $n * fact($n - 1);
}
}
say fact(5);
The failure is at runtime, not com
