> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Is there a refinement /deep for word with the refinement/dup ?
> >
> >If not, I think, that /dup as refinement for words like insert should
> be
> >omitted in favour of the refinement /dup for the word copy.
>
> Boy would that increase time and memory usage!
>
I use that to build a hierarchical message skeleton with repetitions of
blocks inside of blocks with empty data (null values). The position determines
the meaning. Without copy/deep I could not insert or change certain parts
without changing others. Storing the position as an further element of an
item would require an extra coded renumbering after insert or delete.
> But, if you want to do that, to replace a theoretical
> insert dest copy/dup/deep src num
> with
> loop num [dest: insert dest copy/deep src] dest: head dest
> which should be about as fast.
Of course I use my own comparable routine.)
>
> Perhaps you should consider a copy-on-write strategy as a time
> and memory saving measure. I know that many don't think about
> such things today, but copy/deep takes time. Time and memory
> considerations are even more important in interpreted code.
>
> Brian Hawley
>
If I want faster execution instead of easy development, I am using a C
compiler or an other adequate tool.
regards
AR
AR
--
Sent through GMX FreeMail - http://www.gmx.net
