# Is faster using abbreviated parameter names? **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [March 2, 2009, 9:50pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829 "2009-03-02T21:50:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 9:50pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829/1 "2009-03-02T21:50:50Z")
Hi, a simple question: a) def hello(string) # stuff with ‘string’ end b) def hello(s) # stuff with ‘s’ end Will be b) faster since the parameter name contains less letters? ---
**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 9:56pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829/2 "2009-03-02T21:56:47Z")
On 02.03.2009 21:48, Iñaki Baz C. wrote: > end > > Will be b) faster since the parameter name contains less letters? I have no idea. I guess not. But you can easily verify for yourself. Just write up a little program using Benchmark and you’ll soon know. Kind regards robert ---
**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 10:08pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829/3 "2009-03-02T22:08:31Z")
El Lunes, 2 de Marzo de 2009, Robert K. escribió:\> \> # stuff with ‘s’ > > end > > > > Will be b) faster since the parameter name contains less letters? > > I have no idea. I guess not. But you can easily verify for yourself. > Just write up a little program using Benchmark and you’ll soon know. Yes, doing a benchmark the result is more or less the same (any other factor seems to be more important), but what I want to know is what should be the response based on how Ruby works. Under my understanding Ruby needs to parse during runtime the variable name so a longer variable name would require more time, am I wrong? Thanks a lot. ---
**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 10:27pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829/4 "2009-03-02T22:27:54Z")
Iñaki Baz C. wrote: > Yes, doing a benchmark the result is more or less the same (any other > factor > seems to be more important), but what I want to know is what should be > the > response based on how Ruby works. Under my understanding Ruby needs to > parse > during runtime the variable name so a longer variable name would require > more > time, am I wrong? I believe you’re wrong. Symbols are resolved into references to the symbol table at parse time, so when running, :s and :ssssssssssssssss are just two different pointers into the same symbol table. As for local variables, they are just offsets into the stack frame. So it might take a microscopically small amount of extra time for your program to start up, reading a few extra bytes of source code, but once it’s running, each iteration should take the same time. ---
**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2009, 10:09pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829/5 "2009-03-02T22:09:42Z")
And how much faster would it have to be to make it worth it to use a meaningless name versus a meaningful one? Smells like premature optimization to me… Cheers, dwh ---
**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 12:05am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829/6 "2009-03-03T00:05:41Z")
El Lunes, 2 de Marzo de 2009, Brian C. escribió: > I believe you’re wrong. > > Symbols are resolved into references to the symbol table at parse time, > so when running, :s and :ssssssssssssssss are just two different > pointers into the same symbol table. As for local variables, they are > just offsets into the stack frame. > > So it might take a microscopically small amount of extra time for your > program to start up, reading a few extra bytes of source code, but once > it’s running, each iteration should take the same time. Thanks, that makes sense 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 1:16am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829/7 "2009-03-03T01:16:00Z")
Good to hear. It’s just remarkable how lots of people start at the end and work their way backwards… 😉 dwh ---
**Author:** ![ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/i/51bf81/32.png) [@ISSSSaki\_Baz\_C](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ISSSSaki_Baz_C)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2009, 12:07am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/is-faster-using-abbreviated-parameter-names/161829/8 "2009-03-03T00:07:26Z")
El Lunes, 2 de Marzo de 2009, Denis H. escribió: > And how much faster would it have to be to make it worth it to use a > meaningless name versus a meaningful one? > > Smells like premature optimization to me… Sure, it was just curiosity 🙂 I will not code in Ruby to get a unreadable code like in other languages 🙂