[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Monotone-devel] Re: [PATCH] monotone ls authors
From: |
Steven E. Harris |
Subject: |
[Monotone-devel] Re: [PATCH] monotone ls authors |
Date: |
Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:33:45 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) XEmacs/21.4.13 (cygwin32) |
Nathaniel Smith <address@hidden> writes:
> It's completely against the idiom,
What idiom? It's idiomatic in our house style here.
> uglifies the code,
Yes, perhaps.
> and does _not_ improve performance. (end() is inlined anyway!)
Even if so, you're inlining something that looks like this
,----
| iterator end()
| {
| return (iterator(_Mylast));
| }
`----
(constructing a spurious temporary) on every termination
test. Inlining may save call overhead but says nothing about
eliminating operations.
Maybe it's not worth worrying over a small difference here, but in our
own code base here we would flag the repeated end() check in a code
review and require it to be changed. Apparently idioms are less common
than we assume.
--
Steven E. Harris