Re: Nested function definition question

[Ray Andrews <rayandrews@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2019-07-16 1:43 a.m., Nick Cross wrote:
> Is there a way of 'inlining' the definition of common in foo so that I 
> don't have to call it each time? ( but the source can still be 
> separated out for maintenance purposes )
Why would you want to?  It's interpreted so there'd be almost no 
difference in speed even if you did actually inline it, no?  Mind I 
suppose if 'common()' was autoloaded there might be a microsecond 
improvement but.