Objects in rebol
[1/2] from: kevin1::chorg::darpa::org at: 19-Jun-2001 17:59
Does using OOP in rebol (REBOL)? slow down the language at all? Usually OOP does do that , but the slowdown varies from lang to lang. How about rebol?
[2/2] from: joel:neely:fedex at: 19-Jun-2001 17:01
Hi, Kevin, kevin1 wrote:
> Does using OOP in rebol (REBOL)? slow down the language at > all? Usually OOP does do that , but the slowdown varies > from lang to lang. How about rebol? >
It depends on what you're doing, but I ran one quick test as described below. The usual trade-off is between using passive data structures fed to as arguments to functions versus using objects with method calls. I build a block of a few thousand copies of a reference to [17 42 666] then looped through them a few thousand times feeding each block to sum-blk: func [b [block!]] [b/1 + b/2 + b/3] then again the same number of times feeding the components of each block to sum-args: func [a [integer!] b [integer!] c [integer!]] [ a + b + c ] Then, using a specimen object: obj: make object! [ a: 17 b: 42 c: 666 sum-of: does [a + b + c] ] I built the same number of objects using OBJ as a prototype, then looped through them, calling the SUM-OF method on each. With equivalent counts, sum-blk 196 seconds sum-args 229 seconds sum-of 227 seconds So, for this little test, the overhead of using an object is roughly the same as the overhead of passing separate arguments pulled out of a data structure. However, REBOL objects have another cost factor; every time we create a new object using (for example): foo: make obj  the new object gets a copy of *all* components, whether they are "data-like" or "method-like" (REBOL doesn't distinguish between data and code). Hope this helps! -jn- ------------------------------------------------------------ Programming languages: compact, powerful, simple ... Pick any two! joel'dot'neely'at'fedex'dot'com