<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Optimizing Range Iteration</title>
	<atom:link href="http://justrakudoit.wordpress.com/2010/07/28/optimizing-range-iteration/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://justrakudoit.wordpress.com/2010/07/28/optimizing-range-iteration/</link>
	<description>I Never Metaop I Didn&#039;t Like</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:58:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: b</title>
		<link>http://justrakudoit.wordpress.com/2010/07/28/optimizing-range-iteration/#comment-2339</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[b]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:27:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justrakudoit.wordpress.com/?p=132#comment-2339</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hmm.  I would imagine that all the iterator-calling code produces quite a lot of overhead, and that the code would run much faster if all the iterator code was inlined by the compiler and optimized until the compiled code is not much more complicated than a &quot;for&quot; loop written in PIR, i.e. without any calls to library functions.  The last time I tested it, a simple integer loop in PIR was almost as fast as in C.

So, the question that comes to mind is whether the compiler will be able to achieve this at some point.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hmm.  I would imagine that all the iterator-calling code produces quite a lot of overhead, and that the code would run much faster if all the iterator code was inlined by the compiler and optimized until the compiled code is not much more complicated than a &#8220;for&#8221; loop written in PIR, i.e. without any calls to library functions.  The last time I tested it, a simple integer loop in PIR was almost as fast as in C.</p>
<p>So, the question that comes to mind is whether the compiler will be able to achieve this at some point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
