|
|
Posted by Jochem Maas on 06/09/05 20:54
Brian Dunning wrote:
> On Jun 9, 2005, at 9:44 AM, Jochem Maas wrote:
>
>> or (c) just placing the code inside the loop - no function call , no
>> include,
>> just wash and go ;-) - whichever is faster of (a) and (b), my (c)
>> will be faster still. :-)
>
>
> I agree (c) would be swell but this is a function that I call from many
> different places and that would make it too hard to manage.
you mentioned it was 6 lines of code - replicating it and commenting the code
(mention where it came from) if you need the speed doesn't seem like a big deal,
however if you insist that the function must be used then you have just
ruled out the possibility of using an include. unless you intend to make a call
to your function from inside the include file, in which case that will be slower
(your doing an include + a function call on every iteration).
case closed?
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|