Re: Smoke [5.11.0] 32864 FAIL(F) MSWin32 Win2003 SP2 (x86/1 cpu)

[perl5.git] / lib / mro.pm

diff --git a/lib/mro.pm b/lib/mro.pm
index c463938..858b8e5 100644 (file)
--- a/lib/mro.pm
+++ b/lib/mro.pm
@@ -315,39 +315,6 @@ In simple cases, it is equivalent to:
 But there are some cases where only this solution
 works (like C<goto &maybe::next::method>);
 
-=head1 PERFORMANCE CONSIDERATIONS
-
-Specifying the mro type of a class before setting C<@ISA> will
-be faster than the other way around.  Also, making all of your
-C<@ISA> manipulations in a single assignment statement will be
-faster that doing them one by one via C<push> (which is what
-C<use base> does currently).
-
-Examples:
-
-  # The slowest way
-  package Foo;
-  use base qw/A B C/;
-  use mro 'c3';
-
-  # The fastest way
-  # (not exactly equivalent to above,
-  #   as base.pm can do other magic)
-  use mro 'c3';
-  use A ();
-  use B ();
-  use C ();
-  our @ISA = qw/A B C/;
-
-Generally speaking, every time C<@ISA> is modified, the MRO
-of that class will be recalculated, because of the way array
-magic works.  Pushing multiple items onto C<@ISA> in one push
-statement still counts as multiple modifications.  However,
-assigning a list to C<@ISA> only counts as a single
-modification.  Thus if you really need to do C<push> as
-opposed to assignment, C<@ISA = (@ISA, qw/A B C/);>
-will still be faster than C<push(@ISA, qw/A B C/);>
-
 =head1 SEE ALSO
 
 =head2 The original Dylan paper