OO languages are similar in many respects. Apparently, (Tip 213, Anthony Porter, The best C++ Tips Ever, McGraw Hill)
when you increment 'a' and access it with ++a, you increment 'a', and use a reference to it. but with a++, you make a temporary copy of 'a' increment the original and return a copy of the temporary, not a reference it, because the temporary object is destroyed. That's the overhead. Even passing objects back from functions involve the creation of temporary objects. I am right in thinking that p code is pseudo-code and therefore does not indicate code bytes? John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Sacks | BLITZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Flashcoders mailing list" <flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:07 AM Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Find item in array > using a for..i..in loop will always be faster It's been proven before here on flashcoders that for in is not faster than --a -(-1) because it compiles to more lines of pcode. I guess it's time to use Flasm to bust out some pcode and post it here on the list instead of making claims based on hunches and past posts in the archives. _______________________________________________ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com _______________________________________________ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
