* On Tue, Mar 03 2009, Jonathan Yu wrote: > Choosing array-based parameterization instead of hashes seems to be a > bad idea to me, because you could potentially end up with lots of > cases of sparse arrays.
... > Personally I wouldn't want the added overhead of that sort of checking > on each hash call (especially since TIEd interfaces are known to be > slow, or at least widely believed thus). ... > Anyway, my point is: to each their own, and profiling is more > important than Big Oh notation. The impression I get from your post is that big-O notation upsets you, and you say to measure instead. OK. But instead of analyzing algorithms or doing measurements, you just make stuff up. Do you really think that speculation is better than mathematical reasoning? > This is just one of the many things I have been upset with the > treatment of in my Computer Science program--it's way too academic, > and not applied enough, but I suppose that's University in general. Well, sort of. Most CS programs don't cover anything academic either. This is why you end up with reimplementations of bubble sort and parsers built from hackish regular expressions. I think we can all agree that that kind of lack of understanding makes software hard to maintain (and it makes it perform poorly too). (Oh, and don't get me started on the widely-held belief that relational databases are built from magic pixie dust rather than simple data structures. That one really brings out the wackos.) Regards, Jonathan Rockway -- print just => another => perl => hacker => if $,=$"
