My reason for asking was, I was wondering if an analysis of how frequently
functions were called, and from where, could affect how quickly they would
be stepped to. I have seen this behavior in SuperBASIC on JM/JS and
achieved often useful gains in improvements by placing the most frequently
called functions at the beginning or the program.
I was wondering if this was still true with the BASIC on SMSQ/Minerva.
That let to the overloading question, which would allow the collapsing of
many functions into a single function using polymorphism.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 5:10 PM, Jan Bredenbeek via Ql-Users <
ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com> wrote:
> On 20 June 2018 at 22:35, Dave Park via Ql-Users >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Separately, does the sBASIC in SMSQ or Minerva still scan for
> > procedures/functions from the beginning of the program, so earlier
> FN/PROCs
> > have a speed advantage over later ones like in JM/JS?
>
>
> SuperBASIC (JM/JS/Minerva) stores line numbers along with proc/fn names in
> the name table and can search backward and forward for them in the program.
> So it merely depends on how far away the proc/fn definition is from the
> calling code in terms of lines.
> I don't know how SBASIC handles this but as it is said to be more a
> compiler than an interpreter it could be very well different (the most
> efficient way would of course be to store addresses rather than line
> numbers but this could break if the program is changed and then
> CONTINUEd/RETRYd).
>
> Jan.
>
> --
> *Jan Bredenbeek* | Hilversum, NL | j...@bredenbeek.net
> ___
> QL-Users Mailing List
>
--
Dave Park
d...@sinclairql.com
___
QL-Users Mailing List
