Lazy eval -- an example issue

[kris]

Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
> kris wrote:
> 
>>> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:33:08 -0700, Paolo Invernizzi  
>>> <arathorn at NOSPAM_fastwebnet.it> wrote:
>>> can you post us the performance difference you  have noticed using 
>>> the char[] version versus the delegate version?
>>
>>
>> As for performance differences, I suspect you're missing the bigger 
>> picture, Paolo?
> 
> 
> I've followed the discussion.
> 
> While I agree that ambiguities must be avoided if possible, and that 
> compiler-made decision are sometimes frustrating (but we all are happy 
> about class-all-virtual-methods!), I was just curious of the performance 
> impact of such a change...


That's simple ~ time a trivial function by calling it several million 
times. Now add a malloc(40) or thereabouts to the same function and time 
it again. There's your performance hit. Note that multithreaded apps 
will run afoul of mutex-contention also.

As for virtual methods; you can choose which are virtual and which are 
not. Seriously though, virtual methods do not allocate from the heap 
when they are called. Imagine if they did ...