On 12-05-21 01:07 AM, David Christensen wrote:
That's what I thought, until I started writing subroutines that modified
@_ and stomped on the the caller's variables.
Yes, that's what it does. That's why it's recommended to copy the values
to my variables inside the subroutine.
--
Just my
I know this will sound incredibly stupid and n00bish, but I've
encountered something I've never dealt with before. I'm setting up a
perl based web application (this is my first web app, not my first perl)
and have an issue with multiple DBI calls in a page and how I handle
those calls. For
i have a whole collection of scripts that does this... at home.
it's been quite a while but i believe what you want is
$dbh-commit;
$dbh-disconnect'
to close a particular connection.
hopefully someone can verify/correct
http://search.cpan.org/~timb/DBI-1.620/DBI.pm
will document all the details
On May 20, 2012, at 10:07 PM, David Christensen wrote:
I've updated function_arguments.pl with Benchmark, below. f_direct() is the
fastest, f_shift() is in the middle (12% slower), and f_assign() is the
slowest (37%).
David,
Are you saying that it would be faster to do:
my
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 12:40:15PM -0700, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
On May 20, 2012, at 10:07 PM, David Christensen wrote:
I've updated function_arguments.pl with Benchmark, below. f_direct() is the
fastest, f_shift() is in the middle (12% slower), and f_assign() is the
slowest
On May 20, 2012, at 8:28 AM, Shlomi Fish wrote:
The problem is that «$self-animals» returns an (unblessed) array reference
and
not the list of individual animals, so you should do something like:
for my $animal (@{ $self-animals }) {
Thanks, Shlomi. That did it. Moose is a new
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is faster than another,
wouldn't it be better to do it that way, as long as it doesn't
On 2012-05-21 13:40, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
On May 20, 2012, at 10:07 PM, David Christensen wrote:
I've updated function_arguments.pl with Benchmark, below. f_direct() is the
fastest, f_shift() is in the middle (12% slower), and f_assign() is the slowest
(37%).
David,
Are
On 2012-05-21 14:12, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is faster than another,
wouldn't it
On 12-05-21 04:32 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote:
On 2012-05-21 14:12, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is
On 2012-05-21 14:51, Shawn H Corey wrote:
On 12-05-21 04:32 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote:
On 2012-05-21 14:12, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm
On 05/21/2012 03:12 PM, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is faster than another,
wouldn't
For one thing, there is the Lies, Damned Lies and Benchmarks factor
I must have missed the e-mail that said DOG PILE!!!. =;)
Thanks to everyone for the explanations - all good food for thought.
That's why I'm here.
Marc
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
On 05/21/2012 12:40 PM, sono-io wrote:
David,
Are you saying that it would be faster to do:
my $this_date = shift;
my $output = shift;
as opposed to:
my ($this_date, $output) = @_;
or am I not reading your assessment correctly?
1. Benchmarking on the target
On 21/05/2012 21:12, sono...@fannullone.us wrote:
Hi Paul,
Please don't care about this until your code is running correctly but
too slowly and profiling has determined that this is the bottleneck.
I'm curious as to why you say this. If one way is faster than
another, wouldn't it be better
On 2012-05-21 21:10, David Christensen wrote:
On 05/21/2012 12:40 PM, sono-io wrote:
David,
Are you saying that it would be faster to do:
my $this_date = shift;
my $output = shift;
as opposed to:
my ($this_date, $output) = @_;
or am I not reading your assessment correctly?
1. Benchmarking on
On 05/21/2012 08:37 PM, Steve Bertrand wrote:
On 2012-05-21 21:10, David Christensen wrote:
Therefore, performance is first and clarity is second.
Would you not agree that these are pretty extreme cases to be making
such a wide-reaching decision on?
Please trim your replies.
No, I don't
17 matches
Mail list logo
