From: Dan Sugalski <dan@...>
Date: 2003-01-06T10:08:29+09:00
Subject: Re: Compile time constant folding?

At 9:19 AM +0900 1/6/03, Mark Probert wrote:
>Hi.
>
>Dan Sugalski wrote in comp.lang.ruby:
>>
>>  Is it valid to do compile-time constant folding as an optimization?
>>
>
>IMO, the POLS wouldn't be breeched if this were to happen.
>Unless the overloaded operator does something completely
>strange (eg redefine "+" as "*"). I guess that typing may
>also be an issue.

I can see it going either way--the interpreter could do what it's 
doing on purpose, or because the optimization just never was done. 
(Or that it wasn't ever really thought about)

It's not like this is expensive in the simple case, but when you do 
something like:

    (1 / sin(2.3)) * log(4)

in a loop, well, that can add up pretty quickly.
-- 
                                         Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even
                                       teddy bears get drunk