Re^2: How fast is fast?

Man I love Perl what you chattin' about?

I just treat my files in a similar way I've always treated them coming at the problem from a 90's graphics demo coder perspective. It's how I've evolved as a programmer, and now oh look, Perl is about to learn how to exploit graphics processing power :):):):):):):)

If I needed my code to run on a 386, I'd write it in C/asm and hand optimise the inner loops... I don't need to do that!

Comment on Re^2: How fast is fast?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: How fast is fast? by Anonymous Monk on Aug 07, 2011 at 22:10 UTC
If I needed my code to run on a 386, I'd write it in C/asm and hand optimise the inner loops... LOLOLOL!!	[reply]
Re^4: How fast is fast? by Anonymous Monk on Aug 09, 2011 at 06:56 UTC
Considering the Perl code you've shown, I'd stick to C since the compiler will obviously be much more efficient than your lame attempts at ASM.	[reply]
Re^4: How fast is fast? by jdporter (Paladin) on Aug 08, 2011 at 16:08 UTC
I'd like to know what that stands for. Is it "laughing out laughing out laughing out loud" or is it "laughing out loud out loud out loud"?	[reply]
Re^5: How fast is fast? by FunkyMonk (Chancellor) on Aug 08, 2011 at 22:07 UTC
Lists Of Lists Of Lists Of Lists aka Lisp	[reply]
Re^5: How fast is fast? by Anonymous Monk on Aug 08, 2011 at 16:29 UTC
I think its a 2D array of LOLs	[reply]
Re^5: How fast is fast? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Aug 08, 2011 at 17:19 UTC
Lepidoptery On LSD Often Lessens Our Losses.	[reply]


We don't bite newbies here... much
	PerlMonks