Timeline for performance versus reusability
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2015 at 20:38 | comment | added | Sled | @leftaroundabout Well I meant at the source code level, but you are very right. There is no reason a sufficiently smart compiler couldn't replace your bubble sort with a quick sort! | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 20:38 | history | edited | Sled | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 126 characters in body
|
| Apr 15, 2015 at 20:06 | comment | added | leftaroundabout | Modularity and optimisation are not necessarily at odds. Modern compilers can inline pretty much anything anywhere, so no matter how modular you write, as long as the compiler can stitch it together to a “non-modular executable”, there's no reason it couldn't be as fast as code that was written non-modular in the first place. Of course, not all compilers can do this very well, but... | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 16:50 | history | answered | Sled | CC BY-SA 3.0 |