I assume GP is talking about the bit in the article that goes
> RCT does this trick all the time, and even in its OpenRCT2 version, this syntax hasn’t been changed, since compilers won’t do this optimization for you.
There was a recent article on HN about which compiler optimizations would occur and which wouldn't and it was surprising in two ways - first, it would make some that you might not expect, and it would not make others that you would - because in some obscure calling method, it wouldn't work. Fixing that path would usually get the expected optimization.
I think the (OP) article has screwed up here. The article, and I think its original source, name a particular set from the theater as the palace's Mona Lisa. But the article has a picture of the theater itself, and even misnames the theater after the set.
Tatler source: "This includes machinery that causes a tree to rise from a trapdoor and three sets – a simple interior, a forest and a temple of Minerva – the latter being the oldest intact decor in the world, dating back to 1754 – ‘our own Mona Lisa,’ said Masson."
OP article: "What is it? The Temple of Minerva theater set (c.1754) from Marie-Antoinette’s private theater."
OP caption on picture of theater: "Temple of Minerva theater (c. 1754)"
reply