> > > Style A: > > > > > > if can_use_fast_path: > > > return "fast path result" > > > # do slow stuff > > > return "slow path result" > > > > > > > > > Style B: > > > > > > result = "fast path result" > > > if !can_use_fast_path: > > > # do slow stuff > > > result = "slow path result" > > > return result > > > > How expensive is evaluating can_use_fast_path? > > Does it matter? It's got to be evaluated in either route. Assume > that it's cheap compared to the cost of the slow path (otherwise it's > not worth doing the test, of course...)
Hmm. I'd choose Style A since with Style B there's a chance I'd have to discard one result and evaluate three things. Unless there's some parallel funny-stuff... what's the probability of can_use_fast_path? James -- The Holy ettlz theholyet...@googlemail.com PGP key ID: 03F94B5D -----------------------------------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Please post to: Hampshire@mailman.lug.org.uk Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --------------------------------------------------------------
