Hi Andrew, Instead of declaring the combinator inline you can also use call(. (Refer to '\ call( help' for details).
As far as code size goes, each, map and other simple combinators expand into relatively small amounts of code. 'sort' is an exceptional case. Slava On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 2:41 AM, Андрей Полищук <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > im newbie to factor, > but i think i already like it, > but there's one thing that scares me: > > Every time when we have combinators we have to deal > with stack-effect checking of passed funarg(s) and as written > in manuals, and as done for standart combinators, the way to solve > this is to declare that combinator inline. But isn't it too inefficient, that > every call to map/reduce/each/sort/..etc will not simply jump to some > routine, but > expand to mostly the same big amount of code? > > Thanks. > Ander > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by > > Make an app they can't live without > Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge > http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Factor-talk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Make an app they can't live without Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge http://p.sf.net/sfu/RIM-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Factor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
