On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:31:57 -0700, Brad Roberts wrote:
> Which argues for the globals to be immutable, so the cost goes away and > we're back where we started. :) Which actually brings back memories of my COBOL and IBM/360 assembler days. The mantra then was "everything must be reenterant" so the norm was that mutable globals were seen as evil. However, later I worked at a place where assembler abuse was taken to the artform level - self-modifying code was encouraged! -- Derek Parnell Melbourne, Australia skype: derek.j.parnell
