On Mar 25, 2011, at 12:54 25PM, Igor Stasenko wrote: > On 25 March 2011 12:35, Stefan Marr <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi: >> >> On 25 Mar 2011, at 11:01, Toon Verwaest wrote: >> >>> If you really win a lot of performance by doing so, this is justified >>> (although I would still give it a different class than just Array ;)). I'm >>> just trying to find out if that performance boost is really there. But I'm >>> going to take this offline I think not to pollute the whole mailing list >>> with our circular conversations, and I'll report back if we figure >>> something interesting out ;) >> Well, for what it is worth, I really enjoy such discussions. And they are >> much more than all the usual ones here on the list ;) >> >> If you do not feel that the Pharo mailing list is the right place, there is >> always an almost unused smalltalk research mailing list... >> > No, it is right place for such discussions. > Come on, since when extra mail traffic in Pharo list became a problem? :)
Agreed. Interesting technical discussion is much better than all of the "Cool!" and "Me too!" posts we already get. (Which of course, ironically, this is one) > For people who interested in topic (like me), they can read and learn > something new (and put their ignorant 2cents ;) . > And if you do it privately, then we will have just two people who know > how closures are implemented instead of 10 or 20 ones. And if I don't have time now delve in deep now, it's always searchable later. No need to send emails asking participants what happened to the experiments they ran in private as a result of that thread I spotted, but didn't have time to read thoroughly 4 months ago :) Cheers, Henry
