Anonymous user
User talk:Kevin Reid: Difference between revisions
→eql and = in CL
No edit summary |
|||
Line 35:
Unless performance is at issue, code should be written to be clear. One heuristic for clarity is to use the most specific (reasonably) operator that applies to the types being worked with, so = rather than EQL for numbers. Also, = will compare integers and floats by value. With regard to performance: I could equally argue that a compiler with unboxed-number support but not a full set of optimizations would need to box the numbers to invoke EQL on them, but not for = since that is an always-numeric operator. So I can't agree with your performance assumption without actual benchmark data. --[[User:Kevin Reid|Kevin Reid]] 16:43, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I've often contributed to WIKI sites and spammers are a bother. They just can't be stopped. They just keep coming back time and time again. Now I here they also utilise fake references and the like. I hope you win through and carry the day. :-) [[Special:Contributions/82.118.119.61|82.118.119.61]] 16:26, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
== Toadstool not lispy enough? ==
| |||