Ask HN: Can someone explain why this line exists?

Re:Ask HN: Can someone explain why this line exists? by qu4z-2 on Wednesday May 29, 2013 @09:11PM (#5790336)

I'd tend to choose temporary variables. I trust my compiler to optimise them out, and I find it makes it much easier to find the appropriate place to change or add new code.

"Does this affect working out whether the error has been logged before?", "Does this affect whether we should log this error?", etc

EDIT: But in this case I'd still want to put a comment clarifying the "why".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Can someone explain why this line exists? by ranman on Thursday May 30, 2013 @01:42AM (#5791116)

are you sure the compiler is smart enough to do that? I think we frequently assume compilers are smarter than they really are because we don't fully understand them anymore... but in practice I find they often do very dumb things.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Can someone explain why this line exists? by lmm on Thursday May 30, 2013 @08:18AM (#5792005)

No, but I am sure that my automated performance testing procedures will detect if I've introduced a significant performance problem, and it would be an inefficient use of my time to worry about insignificant performance effects.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Ask HN: Can someone explain why this line exists? by Dylan16807 on Thursday May 30, 2013 @09:26PM (#5796336)

Register renaming is one of the most very basic levels of optimization. I challenge you to find me a single optimizing compiler that slows down when you give names to temporary results. Hell, I can show you non-optimizing compilers that suffer no slowdown from code like this.

[ Parent | on HN ]