Re: When/why did function calls get cheap?

"Glen Herrmannsfeldt" <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>
13 Feb 2003 00:49:35 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
When/why did function calls get cheap? peter@javamonkey.com (Peter Seibel) (2003-02-12)
Re: When/why did function calls get cheap? strohm@airmail.net (John R. Strohm) (2003-02-13)
Re: When/why did function calls get cheap? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (Glen Herrmannsfeldt) (2003-02-13)
Re: When/why did function calls get cheap? bje@redhat.com (Ben Elliston) (2003-02-21)
Re: When/why did function calls get cheap? joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2003-02-21)
Re: When/why did function calls get cheap? marcov@toad.stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2003-02-21)
Re: When/why did function calls get cheap? firefly@diku.dk (Peter Finderup Lund) (2003-02-21)
Re: When/why did function calls get cheap? firefly@diku.dk (Peter Finderup Lund) (2003-02-21)
Re: When/why did function calls get cheap? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2003-02-21)
[14 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Glen Herrmannsfeldt" <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 13 Feb 2003 00:49:35 -0500
Organization: AT&T Broadband
References: 03-02-073
Keywords: performance, history
Posted-Date: 13 Feb 2003 00:49:35 EST

"Peter Seibel" <peter@javamonkey.com> wrote in message
> My understanding is that in Olden Times, Real Programmers avoided
> using lots of small functions because the overhead of a function call
> was considered high. But then, somewhere along the way, the compiler
> writers got clever and made function calls cheap so now nobody worries
> about it. Is that more or less correct? ...


If this is homework, please reference the newsgroup.


As far as I know, the main thing that changed is computers got faster.


A calling convention that depends on allocating/deallocating memory
has the cost of memory allocation, which can be considerable.


There are comparisons of the speed of Java relative to C++.
Object-oriented programming has a relatively larger cost because it
tends to require more allocation/deallocation relative to non-OO
programming.


-- glen


Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.