> From: Martin Akesson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 21:00:40 +0100
>
> So, just because we have faster computers we should make programs that
> are not as efficient as they "used" to be? Your filosofy is pretty much
> what Microsoft is working on and I for one do not like it. If you can
> make it fast, then make is _fast_. Not because you have to but because
> you can, there is no need to write less efficient code just because
> a fast computer make the new, albeit slow, code run just as fast as the old
> code, the fast one, on an slow machine. Thats just being dumb.
You can optimize for CPU time; you can optimize for programmer time; you can
optimize for user time. You can't optimize for all three at once unless the
original code was incredibly bad.
The perl camel book actually breaks this down into 6 categories as follows:
Time Efficiency
Space Efficiency
Programmer Efficiency
Maintainer Efficiency
Porter Efficiency
User Efficiency
and many of the advice in each of those sections contradicts advice in the
other sections.
Chris
--
Chris Garrigues http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/
virCIO http://www.virCIO.Com
4314 Avenue C
Austin, TX 78751-3709 +1 512 374 0500
My email address is an experiment in SPAM elimination. For an
explanation of what we're doing, see http://www.DeepEddy.Com/tms.html
Nobody ever got fired for buying Microsoft,
but they could get fired for relying on Microsoft.
PGP signature
