Re^7: Why is const x const not a const?

I don't know why B::Concise doesn't dump the contents of array, but B::Concise does show that the array is in the optree.

$ perl -MO=Concise,-exec -e'my @a = 1..1000'
1  <0> enter 
2  <;> nextstate(main 1 -e:1) v:{
3  <0> pushmark s
4  <$> const[AV ] s
              ^
              |

5  <1> rv2av lKP/1
6  <0> pushmark s
7  <0> padav[@a:1,2] lRM*/LVINTRO
8  <2> aassign[t4] vKS/COMMON
9  <@> leave[1 ref] vKP/REFC
-e syntax OK
[download]

Comment on Re^7: Why is const x const not a const? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Why is const x const not a const? by moritz (Cardinal) on Jan 24, 2012 at 06:59 UTC
I know that the array is there, but that doesn't convince me that those 100k scalars are built at compile time. There might just as well be a magic initializer attached to it that generates them at runtime, or at closure cloning time or whenever. No matter how big I chose the number in the range, I can't see increased memory consumption at compile time, which is why i suspect they aren't created at compile time. Perl 6 - second systems done right	[reply]
Re^9: Why is const x const not a const? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jan 24, 2012 at 07:07 UTC
I know that the array is there, but that doesn't convince me that those 100k scalars are built at compile time I showed the array is created at compile-time. I showed that once the list is built, it's not freed. I showed through memory usage monitoring that the list is built at compile-time. Not sure what else you want. No matter how big I chose the number in the range, I can't see increased memory consumption at compile time, which is why i suspect they aren't created at compile time. What's your test? Are you mistakenly using `for (CONST..CONST)` instead of the range operator?	[reply] [d/l]