[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Rainer Blome wrote:
> > You can get 90% of 'if bool then else':
> > if: bool Then: thenClause Else: elseClause =
> > ( bool if: thenClause False: elseClause ).
> Oh, OK. In this case, a macro would indeed be an efficiency hack. Because
> using a message would give up locality there. Where is the `if:Then:Else:'
> slot? In globalBehavior, I guess. And that slot takes time to find. If
> its content is a normal method, it will be evaluated over and over again.
> Maybe the compiler can optimize that away, but I don't think so.
Well, I couldn't let *that* bait go :-) Here's a little experiment:
put the if: .. method in defaultBehavior and create a test object
called foo containing
(| parent* = defaultBehavior*.
test: n With: x With: y = ( n do: [ x < y ifTrue: 'true' False: 'false'] ).
test2: n With: x With: y = ( n do: [ if: x < y Then: 'true' Else: 'false'] ).
[Hint: never put such testing code in the shell, because it has a
dynamic parent that can mess up performance.]
On my system, [foo test: 100000 With: 3 With: 4] time is 135..161 and
[foo test2: 100000 With: 3 With: 4] time is 137..162.
Of course, a *really* smart compiler would execute both in 0 ms, but
that's another story.
- Re: macros
- From: email@example.com (Rainer Blome)