On Sep 18, 2006, at 12:05 PM, J J wrote:
>
> I don't get it.  Right now occurencesOf: impliments a counter.   
> Instead of using the
> library message count: it duplicates the code.  Why?  Well maybe  
> because count: didn't
> exist when it was made.  So we asked about just changing it, and  
> then Andreas (I think it was)
> pointed out that that change would make the occurencesOf: method 3  
> times slower.
> This is a problem.  You agree right?
>
> If Klaus' proposal is wrong ok.  But what is right.  There must be  
> some way to make count:
> not have such a high cost of use compared to just reimplimenting it  
> over and over.

Has anyone ever played with a simple self-sends inliner?  No de- 
inlining when debugging, no post-inlining optimization, no attempt to  
deal with polymorphism, just inlining monomorphic self-sends...

Avi