Re: Storing state information (was Re: Ah, those uninitiated people...)
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Storing state information (was Re: Ah, those uninitiated people...)
- From: Mark Hamburg <mark@...>
- Date: 2010年1月15日 09:54:25 -0800
On Jan 15, 2010, at 3:45 AM, Peter Sommerfeld wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the benchmark and the numbers correctly.
> Does it mean that there is no reason to avoid costly patterns
> like objects using closures (PiL 16.4) and others anymore?
The object benchmarks (and mine which were quite similar) are measuring dispatch and access to object state. What they aren't measuring is the cost of creating and collecting the objects.
Mark
- References:
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., Tony Finch
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., David Kastrup
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., Tony Finch
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., David Kastrup
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., Tony Finch
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., David Given
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., Wesley Smith
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., Sean Conner
- Re: Ah, those uninitiated people..., Mark Hamburg
- Storing state information (was Re: Ah, those uninitiated people...), Mark Hamburg
- Re: Storing state information (was Re: Ah, those uninitiated people...), Mike Pall
- Re: Storing state information (was Re: Ah, those uninitiated people...), Peter Sommerfeld