<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Nicolas Cellier <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com">nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Sorry for the high level of noise...<br>
<br>
I profited by the low traffic to apply Eliot mechanised tool (<br>
<a href="http://www.mirandabanda.org/cogblog/2008/11/14/mechanised-modifications-and-miscellaneous-measurements" target="_blank">http://www.mirandabanda.org/cogblog/2008/11/14/mechanised-modifications-and-miscellaneous-measurements</a><br>
)<br>
+ own manual changes to remove as much writes as possible (in a short<br>
time frame) to remote (external scope) temporaries from within a<br>
closure.<br>
This should fast up a little bit the image (probably not that much<br>
until Cog is available).<br>
<br>
We shall now take the habit of declaring temps in inner scope possible<br>
and avoid writing in outer temps if possible.<br>
By now, the cosmetic changes has at least a virtue of serving as examples...<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This is not purely cosmetic. Block-local temps are more efficient than method-level temps assigned inside blocks. The latter are indirect temps and cost more to access and cause blocks that use them to cost more to create.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
Cheers<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Nicolas<br>
<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>