Actually though, just imagine if each FETCH were tied to something compute intensive.
I can certainly imagine it - however I would still see it as a sign of something being seriously wrong.
Creating a system where a computationally intensive operation became hidden behind an operation that is traditionally computationally cheap would be a design mistake in my book. It confounds expectations.
The reduction in redundancy is a fair point, and I wouldn't want to argue with that being a fan of once and only once myself.
In reply to Re^3: Will Perl 6 abbreviate this indirection for me?
by adrianh
in thread Will Perl 6 abbreviate this indirection for me?
by princepawn
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |