[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: string.len(str) vs str:len()
- From: Rena <hyperhacker@...>
- Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 16:15:57 -0400
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Mason Mackaman <masondeanm@aol.com> wrote:
> Well I just realized that string.len(str) is actually faster than str:len() if it’s in the scope of a localized version of ‘string'
If you're in such a tight inner loop that that difference is worth
considering, you could probably speed it up a little more with
something like:
local slen = string.len
slen(str)
--
Sent from my Game Boy.
- References:
- string.len(str) vs str:len(), Mason Mackaman
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Thiago L.
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Mason Mackaman
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Thiago L.
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Mason Mackaman
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Tim Hill
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Mason Mackaman
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Sean Conner
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Mason Mackaman
- Re: string.len(str) vs str:len(), Mason Mackaman