On Friday, 15 February 2013 at 17:42:30 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 12:11:55 -0500, monarch_dodra
<monarchdo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Also keep in mind that "a < b" is implemented as two calls to
"a.opCmp(b)", and "a.opCmp(b)" is itself usually implemented
as two calls to "something < something else" (!)
Huh?
a < b is implemented as a.opCmp(b) < 0, not two calls to
a.opCmp(b).
Right... sorry.
But still, calling opCmp is usually a bit more expensive that a
simpler function dedicated to giving you a < b.
99% of the time, I agree that it doesn't matter mutch, and the
gain in semantic power trumps performance, but for a dedicated
algorithm, eg sort, there is a definite performance difference...
HOWEVER, when you get to the point of executing a == b, it's
implemented as !(a < b) && !(b < a), which could more
efficiently be rewritten as a.opEquals(b) or a.opCmp(b) == 0.
And that.
