[erlang-questions] Erlang again!

Richard O'Keefe <>
Fri Jul 23 01:47:23 CEST 2010


On Jul 23, 2010, at 5:08 AM, Masklinn wrote:

> On 2010-07-22, at 18:55 , Boris Mühmer wrote:
>> 
>> Is such a solution plain bad, or just a newbie mistake/error?
> 
> I would say it's a not-very-useful reimplementation of something which already exists in the stdlib. It's mostly a question of not knowing your toolbox, so I wouldn't say it's bad, but it definitely isn't optimum.

Depends what you mean by "optimum".
Chances are that either the direct version or the reverse
version is significantly *faster* than the approaches using zip
or zipwith.  The direct version never allocates a word it doesn't
want to keep, so it's the kindest to the garbage collector too.

The cost is in development time and maintenance time.
> 



More information about the erlang-questions mailing list