Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!jpd00964
From: jpd00964@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Inheritance & limited private t
Message-ID: <132000005@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 24 Oct 89 09:40:19 GMT
References: <126675@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Lines: 26
Nf-ID: #R:sun.Eng.Sun.COM:126675:uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:132000005:000:1297
Nf-From: uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!jpd00964    Oct 23 15:01:00 1989


/* Written  2:00 am  Oct 22, 1989 by grover%brahmand@Sun.COM in uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:comp.object */
/* ---------- "Re: Inheritance & limited private t" ---------- */
In article <6845@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>>   It has long been recognized that the time to worry about product
>>   efficiency is AFTER the product has been developed and put through
>>   a profiler to determine where the bottlenecks are in the system,
>>   since in this way the high cost of maximizing efficiency can be
>>   directed to the points at which it will do the most good.

Actually, not disagreeing that your ideas are right, but a clarification.  
Product efficiency is very important during coding.  As a matter of fact, I
personally (IMHO) feel that it is more important than optimizing using a 
profiler.  A large amount of repition can be detected during programming that
a profiler will not tell you about.

>For those of us without profilers, I suppose, there is no hope. Or perhaps
>we should worry about efficiency before the product has been developed, or
>perhaps not to worry about efficiency at all. 

I'm curious, what machine and what lingo are you using that has no profiler?
/* End of text from uxa.cso.uiuc.edu:comp.object */


Michael Rutman
SoftMed