develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from March 2015

Re: OP_SIGNATURE

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Jan Dubois
Date:
March 5, 2015 18:51
Subject:
Re: OP_SIGNATURE
Message ID:
CAD-TLz8RkvqbmxM8gumT2y91F1rSLt+C9WLyRELVcByQiwC1Yg@mail.gmail.com
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Paul "LeoNerd" Evans
<leonerd@leonerd.org.uk> wrote:
>   You might make signature-handling 20% slower than it would be via
>   OP_SIGNATURE, but if you make all the other code a little faster to
>   compensate (including don't forget within for loops, while loops,
>   other places that get hit much more often than function entry/exit)
>   maybe that would more than compensate for it?

I don't see why you can't have *both* OP_SIGNATURE *and* the other new
op types (and I believe Dave already said he is going to investigate
this)?

Why would you give up a 20% speed improvement for some conceived
"purity" in the op code system? It is way too late to turn op codes
into a RISC-style design.

Cheers,
-Jan

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About