in reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: to strict or not to strict
in thread to strict or not to strict

Which apart from the fact that tachyon's machine is about 20x quicker than mine, is a mildly interesting result.
I guess I fail to see how this is even mildly interesting. The rate of loading on your box appears to be 7,281 loads per second. For something that happens only once in a program, can that even be considered any kind of performance hit? I think not.
  • Comment on Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: to strict or not to strict

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: to strict or not to strict
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 17, 2003 at 15:04 UTC

    One of the reasons load-time can be an issue, is for webservers that don't use mod_perl. Using modules that impose a large load-time hit can cause a measurable degradation if they are being loaded 100's of time a second as with a busy website cgi. That, as I understand it, is the very basis of mod_perls existance.

    What made it interesting was the very fact that, if the benchmark is valid, it shows that the runtime hit due to strict is slightly more than 1/10 th of a millisecond, which when compared to beasts like cgi and the various DBI::* modules is so miniscule as to be totally irrelevant, which I found mildly interesting in the context of this thread.

    Examine what is said, not who speaks.
    "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham
    "Think for yourself!" - Abigail
    Hooray!
[reply]
      s so miniscule as to be totally irrelevant, which I found mildly interesting in the context of this thread.
      Ah, I misinterpreted your mild interest entirely, sorry about that.
[reply]

In Section Meditations