Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2006
> I think if you're forwards cloning the entire interpreter, and all back > references are consistent, than the two behaviours are consistent. I was > assuming that the current behaviour is likely more efficient, and given that > we already have the code, it's not like we'd be spending time on writing a > not-fantastic optimisation. Except if the reference only exists on the save stack, then it wont get cloned. -- Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.Thread Previous | Thread Next