Neil Conway said:
>> FUNC_MAX_ARGS - disk/performance penalty for increase, 24, 32?
>
>Until someone takes the time to determine what the performance
>implications of this change will be, I don't think we should
>change this. Given that no one has done any testing, I'm not
>convinced that there's a lot of demand for this anyway.
There's a huge demand for this from the folks involved with OpenACS.
Already many of the functions have run up against the 16 column limit.
Overloading is an ugly cludge for some functions which have 'default'
args, but it's not a complete solution.
Not that it has proven to be slower, but if it were but the difference
was small, I'd say that forcing a recomplile to eek out a little extra
performance is better than forcing it to make code work in the first
place.
32 args, please!
Cheers.