I am not advocating static. I'm advocating for looking at what the compiler outputs when surprising behavior is encountered. The example is extracted from a larger piece of code, and I reported the minimal case as-is.
If anything, the title is meant to be read as "isn't it amusing that something apparently unrelated such as `static` causes a performance improvement".
That said, I have added a note clarifying this at top of the post now.
I thought you made your point neatly and succinctly. Code can be optimized on multiple levels; the compiled result is clearly more efficient. This lesson applies regardless of the language being compiled.
Comments
I am not advocating static. I'm advocating for looking at what the compiler outputs when surprising behavior is encountered. The example is extracted from a larger piece of code, and I reported the minimal case as-is.
If anything, the title is meant to be read as "isn't it amusing that something apparently unrelated such as `static` causes a performance improvement".
That said, I have added a note clarifying this at top of the post now.
I thought you made your point neatly and succinctly. Code can be optimized on multiple levels; the compiled result is clearly more efficient. This lesson applies regardless of the language being compiled.