I personally don't try to do anything too tricky unless I see an obvious performance hit when in testing.
I rather write clean, readable, maintainable code that I or someone else won't have a problem reading in the future. Always code as if the guy who ends up maintaining your code will be a violent psychopath who knows where you live. ~Martin Golding :) On Dec 19, 4:48 am, Szymon Piłkowski <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > So, we've got new javascript engines (v8/jagermonkey), which will use > JIT compilers to do their magic and optimise performance of our core. > The question is: should we still use our own magic to do the same job, > or should we start being nice to the compilers and leave such problems > to them? > From what I understand, the more obvious the code is, the easier it is > to trace for a JIT engine. Performance-wise tricks often obscure the > code, telling the compiler something like "hey, I'm doing my magic > here, don't interfere". > (I'm speaking mostly about such things as reverse-loops, unwinded > loops, bitwise tricks or reducing the scope chain with caching) > Do you know any edible resources covering this subject? > > By the way, as this is my first email here, hello everyone. :) > > -- > Szymon Piłkowski -- To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
