Structs Versus Locals

[wraithseeker]

So.. I want to ask , which is more efficent? Structs do not need to be cleaned up but locals have to be.

E.g

Local unit a = footman
set a = null

Structs

private struct data
unit a

static method create takes nothing returns data
local data d = data.allocate()
set d.a = footman
endmethod
endstruct

private function actions takes nothing returns nothing
local data d = data.create()
endfunction

As u can see , the struct part doesn't need to be nulled / cleaned?

Right now i am puzzled to whether i should only use locals for things that do not need to be nulled e.g reals, integer , etc....

I am currently only using structs for things that need to be nulled, is that correct?

 

[Kenny]

I think you should just stick to locals if you do not need to pass data through timers or whatever.

Just because something needs to be nulled, doesn't necessarily mean that it is inefficient or bad.

Struct members don't need to be nulled because they are overridden when another instance begins (and one of the earlier have finished). Also, there is no reason why you dont have to null struct members. I do it out of habit now... once i initialise a variable (like a unit or something) i just null it when im finished to be safe.

 

[Azlier]

Structs are here for encapsulation. Need to store a whole lotta data on one unit? Struct it! Need to pass lots of data though a timer? Struct it!

Just use locals if you don't need to pass things around. Structs take two function calls to destroy and create, so it all works out using locals. (Note, structs may have extra function calls built in, such as .allocate which is called on .create. That makes three function calls!)

 

[wraithseeker]

I see, thanks for clarifying my doubts bro. + REP both