Re: performance improvements for 1.3

I've considered it, but figured it wouldn't be faster and would make the 
code more complicated. Have you actually benchmarked this and found it 
significantly faster versus concatenation?

John Williams wrote:

> Just out of curiosity, has anyone considered something like:
> 
>    push( @buffer, <expr> );
>    push( @buffer, <expr> );
>    push( @buffer, <expr> );
> 
> And then doing a big join when the buffer gets flushed?
> 
> (It might even make <% @list %> easier to support...)
> 
> ~ John Williams
> 
> 
> On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Jonathan Swartz wrote:
> 
> 
>>By in-line concatenation, I mean that a construction like
>>
>>    Hello, <% $name %>, how are you?
>>
>>gets converted to
>>
>>    $$_outbuf .= 'Hello, ';
>>    $$_outbuf .= $name;
>>    $$_outbuf .= ', how are you?'
>>
>>instead of the current
>>
>>    $m->print('Hello, ');
>>    $m->print($name);
>>    $m->print(', how are you?');
>>
>>where $m->print ultimately does the same concatenation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
> Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
> who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
> Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
> _______________________________________________
> Mason-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mason-devel
> 
> 



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal
Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us
Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl