Re: more on additional optimization

> within it. A primitive truly must be a primitive operation.
> I don't think there is much to be gained here anyway. Eliminating the
> extra Routines being created at each level was a huge savings. This is
> peanuts.
> You may not realize how your change actually helped. The major gain
> from your fix was not really that it saved executing more byte codes,
> it was eliminating time spent in the garbage collector due to
> allocating the 512 slot stacks for each new Routine. By embedding
> method calls rather than Routines, fewer Routines get allocated and so
> less scanning needs to be done in the GC.
>

I see, that makes sense.
Just to understand the primitive issue further.  It would be possible to
write such a method for a specific class (like Routine) but it would have
to explicitly execute the 'next' code itself, right?

RJK