in reply to Re: Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines (anon < named )
in thread Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines

I’m sorry, BrowserUK, but I really don’t quite understand the last sentence in that post.   There is no eval statement in what remains, and therefore I really don’t know if you meant to retract the assertion that you made in the first sentence of your post.   I also don’t quite see the point of your code-sample since it does not appear (as it stands now) to be either complete or runnable.

Ergo, “huh?”

I implicitly assume, always, that “you know whereof you speak,” and especially that you ordinarily work in resource-intensive applications, but I do not grok what you are trying to say here.   Maybe it’s the consequence of previous-versions and edits that I never saw?

Please clarify, preferably in a reply to, vs. a rewrite of, the above post.   Thank you.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines (anon < named )
by Anonymous Monk on Jul 18, 2015 at 14:06 UTC

    You don't even mark updates to your own nodes (example), so you don't get to complain to others.