From: Marnen Laibow-Koser <marnen@...>
Date: 2009-12-06T10:57:59+09:00
Subject: Re: Why doesn't Ruby "compile" strings?

Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
[...]> This clearly shows that using a constant string is faster than 
using a
> string
> writen into the script. So I wonder: why doesn't Ruby "precompile" 
> internally
> the strings appearing in the script?

Well, it would make garbage collection difficult.

> 
> This is, when Ruby interpreter is parsing the script and founds 
> "hello_world",
> couldn't it create the string *just once* and keep in memory forever so 
> next
> time same string is accessed Ruby doesn't need to initiate it?
> Is it imposible due to the design of Ruby?

It's not impossible at all: just use symbols instead of strings.

> 
> PS: I don't know if other languages (Python, PHP, Perlo...) do it or 
> not.

I don't think PHP interns strings.

Best,
-- 
Marnen Laibow-Koser
http://www.marnen.org
marnen@marnen.org
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.