From: "J. Landman Gay" <[email protected]>
Yes, that is what I meant. But Dave Cragg disproved my theory, since
apparently the engine works at the same speed in either case (but I am
still having trouble believing it; it seems counter-intuitive.) I
think
it is better scripting form to quote literals in any case though. It
saves misinterpretation later on when you re-read your scripts, and in
some cases could prevent the engine from mis-interpreting your literal
values as variable names.
Wouldn't the decision whether something is a variable or a literal be
done just once at *compile* time, not a run time? After deciding, the
compiler would point to either the location of a variable or the
location of a literal string - either would be equally fast. So it
doesn't matter how many loops - actually fewer might show up the
slower decision making process during compilation, but even that is
doubtful. Now if the benchmark had 100000 different unquoted literals,
we would see the difference!
I heartily agree that literals should be quoted for all those other
good reasons.
Cheer,
Jerry Jensen
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
