Re: [Nms-cgi-devel] Open question on variable/constants

[Olivier D. <dr...@sh...>]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 06:17:27PM -0800, Wizard wrote:
> In an ideal world, it might. However, there is much more overhead associated
> with creating and calling a subroutine then using a simple scalar. When you
> create a subroutine, Perl needs to create a new namespace, stack, etc., and
> then when called, there is quite a bit of code that needs to be executed in
> order to pass all of the information (even if there isn't any explicitly
> passed) to the subroutine.

Would the "use constant CONSTANTNAME => VALUE" be more efficient? As
efficient as scalars, arrays or hash?

> Although your suggestion would work, I think it's
> a bit of overkill for the sake of saying that it's "better programming
> practice".

Maybe I'm pushing it too far, but I thought the aim of this project was
to provide better quality (in delivering a service, in security and as
a coding model) In my opinion, allowing what should be constants to be
modified isn't a very secure practice. Would you do the same in C?

-Oli

-- 
+----------------------------------------------+
| Olivier Dragon        dr...@sh... |
| Software Engineering II, McMaster University |
+----------------------------------------------+