in reply to Re^5: Performance, Abstraction and HOP
in thread Performance, Abstraction and HOP

This node falls below the community's minimum standard of quality and will not be displayed.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Performance, Abstraction and HOP
by Dominus (Parson) on Sep 02, 2005 at 15:30 UTC
    Says BrowserUk:
    Sorry you feel insulted...
    I "feel insulted" because you insulted me. And I don't believe you are sorry.
    without a mechanism "... to fix the implementation ...", the idea *is* 'academic'.
    I notice that you did not try to defend your insulting characterization of my message as "just hot air".

    Which characterization I dispute, by the way. My remark was not "just hot air", nor was it "academic" in the sense that you meant it. I think most of the other people here are thoughtful enough to see that.

    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re^7: Performance, Abstraction and HOP
by herveus (Prior) on Sep 02, 2005 at 15:18 UTC
    Howdy!

    It remains incumbent on the proponent to make the case that the amount of function calling is actually unnecessary and that reducing it will actually improve performance on the desired axis.

    Oh, by the way, the gratuitous insult remains on the table. If you intend to issue an apology, note that you have not done so by the words you wrote.

    yours,
    Michael