> > On 2004-03-28 at 18:54:08 [+0200], Jared Eldredge wrote: > > references seem a bit more efficient to me: pointers require > > allocation of > > a 4 byte space, > > initialization to the address to which they point and dereferencing > > takes a > > small amount of extra > > time. > > Er, how do you think references work internally? > > CU, Ingo > my bad - my reaction was based on thinking that pointers would be allocated in the heap and references would be allocated in the stack. just plain wrong - so i suppose their wont be any real difference. -jared -- If today is the first day of the rest of your life, what the hell was yesterday?