Skip to main content
Code Review

Return to Answer

replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
Source Link

This appears similar to StackOverflow question 1951192 StackOverflow question 1951192. If you have a real performance need, then try the suggestion there of using FastMM4. You are right that pass-by-reference should blow away pass-by-value for speed on large strings (or large any-kind-of-data).

It could also be worth benchmarking (var data:string) vs. (const data:string) in case the compiler optimizes once better than the other. If they're the same, use const if your function doesn't need to alter the contents of string.

This appears similar to StackOverflow question 1951192. If you have a real performance need, then try the suggestion there of using FastMM4. You are right that pass-by-reference should blow away pass-by-value for speed on large strings (or large any-kind-of-data).

It could also be worth benchmarking (var data:string) vs. (const data:string) in case the compiler optimizes once better than the other. If they're the same, use const if your function doesn't need to alter the contents of string.

This appears similar to StackOverflow question 1951192. If you have a real performance need, then try the suggestion there of using FastMM4. You are right that pass-by-reference should blow away pass-by-value for speed on large strings (or large any-kind-of-data).

It could also be worth benchmarking (var data:string) vs. (const data:string) in case the compiler optimizes once better than the other. If they're the same, use const if your function doesn't need to alter the contents of string.

added 235 characters in body
Source Link
70Mike
  • 101
  • 2

This appears similar to StackOverflow question 1951192. If you have a real performance need, then try the suggestion there of using FastMM4. You are right that pass-by-reference should blow away pass-by-value for speed on large strings (or large any-kind-of-data).

It could also be worth benchmarking (var data:string) vs. (const data:string) in case the compiler optimizes once better than the other. If they're the same, use const if your function doesn't need to alter the contents of string.

This appears similar to StackOverflow question 1951192. If you have a real performance need, then try the suggestion there of using FastMM4. You are right that pass-by-reference should blow away pass-by-value for speed on large strings (or large any-kind-of-data).

This appears similar to StackOverflow question 1951192. If you have a real performance need, then try the suggestion there of using FastMM4. You are right that pass-by-reference should blow away pass-by-value for speed on large strings (or large any-kind-of-data).

It could also be worth benchmarking (var data:string) vs. (const data:string) in case the compiler optimizes once better than the other. If they're the same, use const if your function doesn't need to alter the contents of string.

Source Link
70Mike
  • 101
  • 2

This appears similar to StackOverflow question 1951192. If you have a real performance need, then try the suggestion there of using FastMM4. You are right that pass-by-reference should blow away pass-by-value for speed on large strings (or large any-kind-of-data).

default

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /