[||123||]

If I use a include, but copy it's content to the pawno, not "#include"ing the actual file, will that be faster than using a #include normally?

[MadeMan]

No, it's the same. #include will copy it anyway.

[||123||]

If that's the case, then copying it in pawno should be faster, as it will only take a single action for reading the include, shouldn't it?

[Calgon]

Compile time isn't what you should be worried about. A pawn compiler grabs all the code from includes and your main script and compiles it in to one AMX file.

[||123||]

So, does that mean that there will be a difference in the .amx file, if I remove a #include and compile it? What you mean is, #include also get saved in .amx?

[FireCat]

Quote:

Includes are not saved in the .amx file, they are COMPILED

Doesn't compiling mean creating the amx?
Or put it all together in the amx?

[MoroDan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireCat Doesn't compiling mean creating the amx? Or put it all together in the amx?

Doesn't compiling mean NOT creating the amx.

[Mean]

Compiler is a computer program (or set of programs) that translates source code written in a computer language into another computer language (the target language).
Source: wikipedia.

[||123||]

Alright thanks.