At 03:43 PM 9/1/2001 -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 03:12:17PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Nope, the cost will be paid on all sub calls. We at least need to check on
> > every sub call to see if there are multiple versions of the functions. (We
> > can't tell at compile time if it's a single or multi-method sub call,
> since
> > it can change at runtime) Granted, it's not a huge expense for
> > non-multi-method calls, but it does still impose an overhead everywhere.
>
>Sounds like it could be solved with a function call cache similar to
>the method call cache we have now. Just blow it away if anything
>touches that package's symbol table.
Sure, if we do decide to do it we'll have to come up with some way to do it
efficiently. There'll probably be a cost of some sort no matter what we do,
though it might turn out to be paid by the core coders not the user. (Which
is OK, but I'm trying to minimize those costs where I can too)
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
