loftar wrote:GCC, of course. What would even be the alternative?
Direkled wrote:Thankfully the update didn't remove already existing visitor debuffs so I still have my collection. Can't get any more, unfortunately.
Artemiswhb wrote:I hear some heretics use the microsoft or clang compilers :D
loftar wrote:Well, Clang is okay, I guess, but I actually do depend on quite a few GNU C features, not least of which are nested functions.
Artemiswhb wrote:Don't nested functions have an impact on performance though?
Artemiswhb wrote: If anything it looks really messy imho :D
loftar wrote:Only insofar as they require a simple three-instruction trampoline to be called, which really should not be a big deal.
loftar wrote:Not any more so than nested functions in Python, LABELS/FLET blocks in CL, anonymous classes in Java, or lambda expressions in just about any language that supports them, if you ask me.
And certainly less messy that creating an explicit struct for any callback function that requires context data, and polluting the toplevel namespace with the requisite functions.
Artemiswhb wrote:I suppose, good thing you're not anal about performance like me :)
loftar wrote:jaguar wrote:you are 24h late
Either that, or you are a few weeks late in ensuring you can control your own permissions. Just saying.
ven wrote:After reading this thread I'm considering playing again just to make some metal and buy 22 boats from this guy.
(Still waiting)jorb wrote:Ok, will buff.
loftar wrote:Oh, I can be pretty anal about performance, but you have to pick your fights. In the grand scheme of things, two MOVs and an indirect JMP come pretty much for free. They probably don't even delay the critical path by a single cycle.
Users browsing this forum: Claude [Bot], Python-Requests [Bot], magnet and 74 guests