Talin wrote: > Now, I tend to prefer using a static table vs. the > function-call-per-method simply because of my habits, which tend to be > overly parsimonious with code size and such (It's a side-effect of > working on embedded systems, which is what game consoles effectively > are.) I wouldn't have strong objections to doing it the other way.
Umm. AFAICT, a call with one variable and two constant arguments typically needs 16-20 bytes on x86; a four-item struct with a pointer to a string literal needs 16 bytes plus the string literal, which means that you're restricted to 3-character names if you don't want to waste memory... ...and the decoder will of course be a lot larger, uglier, and slower if it has to test for a whole bunch of strings constants instead just switching on an integer value. Bloat alert. </F> _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
