>>>>> On 22 Nov 92 22:50:05 GMT,
>>>>> Steve Knight
>>>>> from the organization of Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.
>>>>> who can be reached at: sfk@otter.hpl.hp.com
>>>>> (whose comments are cited below with "Steve> "),
>>>>> had this to say in article <116670020@otter.hpl.hp.com>
>>>>> in newsgroups comp.lang.pop
>>>>> concerning the subject of Re: Clarity VS Efficiency in POP11
>>>>> (see <TMR.92Nov21122734@emotsun.bham.ac.uk> for more details)
Steve> Presumably "lblock" is a typo for "lconstant"?
No, lblock, as in:
lblock ;;; create a new lexical block so that lvars in it are unique
...
endlblock;
I'll post all the example if it is still not clear?
Steve> I'll summarise my point here. If you leave considerations of efficiency
Steve> very late then you may miss important design decisions that have to be
Steve> made early. My recommendation is to put efficiency concerns at the top
Steve> of the agenda -- along with equally vital concerns such as designing
Steve> for debugging. However, once the broad issues of efficiency are dealt
Steve> with it is then a mistake to dabble in the fine detail.
Yes, I think I agree with you. Mind you, it is not always easy (as someone
with little experience) to spot which bits of code are going to be
inefficient before they are running!
Tim
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Read, Email: tmr@cs.bham.ac.uk, The Attention and Affect Project
Room LG23, School of Computer Science, The University of Birmingham,
B15 2TT, England, Phone: +44-(0)21-414-4766, Fax: +44-(0)21-414-4281
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|