From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: Macro question (bizarre)
Date: 2000/03/19
Message-ID: <3162477927563017@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 599611694
References: <38D22BF9.DFFE6E3E@emi.u-bordeaux.fr> <8atcu9$f6m$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <m3g0tpnf2e.fsf@world.std.com> <3162359744057189@naggum.no> <m3og8c6scm.fsf@world.std.com>
mail-copies-to: never
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no
X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 953489928 22740 195.0.192.66 (19 Mar 2000 18:18:48 GMT)
Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 8800 8879; fax: +47 8800 8601; http://www.naggum.no
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Mar 2000 18:18:48 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

* Tom Breton <tob@world.std.com>
| So in sum, I grant that values can do a little more than I said, on
| the optimiztion front, but IMO optimization is not something that one
| should think about when coding.

  people who profess aggressively _not_ to care about optimizing tend to
  work just as hard _pessimizing_ their code as those who profess to care
  about optimizing tend to work on optimizing theirs.  the right balance is
  the one that results from deep insight into the costs of all operations
  involved, and the simple concept of avoiding wanton abuse of resources.
  in my opinion, those who argue against optimization on the basis of a
  desire to squander resources, are lazy in a very destructive sense.

#:Erik