- From: Domenic Denicola <domenic@domenicdenicola.com>
- Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 18:37:00 +0000
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU> > I think counting "iterations" is not the right way to think about performance here. The performance cost of incrementing a loop counter is tiny. Fair enough. I think I just saw "two loops" and freaked out irrationally. Concern rescinded. > I assume you did read the thread starting at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-script-coord/2013OctDec/0358.html > ? Indeed. I didn't see performance concerns raised (even misguided ones like mine). I still think only doing one iteration would be more idiomatic, but of course this thread has been debating that back and forth and it sounds like you landed on two iterations, so, shrug.
Received on Monday, 18 November 2013 18:37:39 UTC