Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Calling a subroutine - which is most efficient?

by dragonchild (Archbishop)
on Oct 26, 2008 at 00:46 UTC ( #719591=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Calling a subroutine - which is most efficient?

Interpreter efficiency is identical in both cases. What's more interesting to me is programmer efficiency, specifically maintainability. And, there's no easy answer. In a Perl context, I guess it's whether or not your program is more OO (where you would pass the blessed hashref) or more functional (where you would pass the value in order to be less coupled). It's an interesting thought exercise.


My criteria for good software:
  1. Does it work?
  2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?


Comment on Re: Calling a subroutine - which is most efficient?

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://719591]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chanting in the Monastery: (7)
As of 2014-08-21 22:59 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The best computer themed movie is:











    Results (144 votes), past polls