Den 21.02.2010 23:11, skrev Bryce Kampjes: > On Fri, 2010-02-19 at 14:03 +0100, Levente Uzonyi wrote: > >> On Fri, 19 Feb 2010, Henrik Johansen wrote: >> >> >>> Well, ugly was a strong word. >>> Reusing less, aka. shorter is a better choice, I guess. >>> >> I think the difference is 3 lines for the 4 methods. >> >> >>> Cheers, >>> Henry >>> >>> PS. In VisualWorks, the two perform equally. *Wishing for a Cog VM to >>> test on* :) >>> >> There's no inlining VM available ATM (besides SqueakJ, but that can't >> run current images) and noone knows when one will be. And even though I >> didn't try it, I expect that "inlining by hand" saves time and memory. >> > I'm working on inlining in Exupery at the moment though progress is > still slow. (Time I've two young boys)... > > Bryce >
Will Exupery work on the 0.15 VM now? IIRC, when making it available, you mentioned there was primitive collision between Exupery/Closures. Cheers, Henry _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
