I think in this case the array creation and population makes significant influence on results.
Sure, but in the original case the benchmark is flawed: the test code is being executed many times, and after the first execution, the array @b has been emptied... (unlike the arrays for the other cases)
Code that modifies test input is notoriously tricky to benchmark.
In reply to Re^4: Unpacking and converting
by Anonyrnous Monk
in thread Unpacking and converting
by dwalin
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |