OpenEuphoria

Re: Changes in the ESL papers

• Posted by "Christian Cuvier" <christian.cuvier at agriculture.gouv.fr> Jul 22, 2005
• 548 views

> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 10:52:22 +0200
> From: "Juergen Luethje" <j.lue at gmx.de>
> Subject: Re: Changes in the ESL papers
> 
> 
> Pete Lomax wrote:
> 
> 
>>> On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 01:58:15 +0100, Pete Lomax wrote:
>>>
>>
>>>>> If timing tests indicate no difference, make it compatible with 2.4.
>>>>> I personally still use 2.4 more than 2.5, so if necessary/possible I
>>>>> would like a seqops24.e as well as the main seqops.e (assuming there
>>>>> is some code difference), but I don't think backward compatibility is
>>>>> a good reason to slow anyone down, nor do I think the library authors
>>>>> should start worrying about a[i]+= etc which have since been fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe if there is a seqops24.e it would be "not officially supported".
>>
>>> I retract that. Code it for 2.5 and have a utility to convert to 2.4.
> 
> 
> OK.
> 
> Regards,
>    Juergen
>

Please don't.
s[legth(s)] and s[$] evaluate in different times. Converting 2.5 
optimized code to 2.4 will work, but will lower efficiency. 2.4 
optimized code will track the length of an ever expanding sequence to 
scrape a few microseconds here and there. 2.5 optimized code won't. And 
I don't know a converter smart enough to perform this change of 
implementation.

CChris

> 
> 
> -------------------