![]() |
|
There's more than one way to do things | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( #3333=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
That's cool...I'm not looking to start a pissing
contest, but the question didn't have any replies when I started my post, so I didn't have the benefit of your code. As far as the difference between a pointer and a reference...dude, when it comes down to it, aren't they really just the same thing? Semantically, yes, they're different. Under the hood? I pass things by reference, I give you the address. I use a pointer, it holds the address of something. I make a reference and I point you to a seperate chunk of code. I'm not a complete chimp on that respect. I haven't had the time or inclination to go look at whether or not the interpreter makes full substitutions at references or jumps to the sub when everything's said and done. That's deeper than I've needed to be for a long time. I _am_ an Acolyte, though, and one who does not get to code nearly as much as he wants to, so it is my bad for missing the pretty obvious reference to the native sort. I shouldn't have done that. I've always had that inherent distrust of someone else's code that I haven't thoroughly looked examined, just a leftover from school, and that's why I made the comment about picking a sorting algorithm. I know those ingrown ones are usually good at large data sets, but I like to pull off the lid and see _exactly_ how it's working inside, make sure it fits. You can't blame a guy for that. ever learning, -B. In reply to My bad, but in defense...
by brick
|
|