Re: get/settable vs rawget/set

[Tim Conkling <tconkling@...>]

What about when I'm using the C API and calling the table functions 
from the host program?

On Oct 1, 2003, at 12:12 PM, Adam D. Moss wrote:

> Tim Conkling wrote:
> > If I know that a given table will never have a metatable associated 
> > with it, is there a significant speed advantage to calling the "raw" 
> > table functions rather than gettable and settable?
>
> No... in fact I believe that rawget/rawset are actually slower
> in practice because they incur a function call overhead; 'normal'
> get/set have their own specialized vm opcodes.