Is not having local functions a micro optimisation?

Question

Would moving the inner function outside of this one so that its not created everytime the function is called be a micro-optimisation?

In this particular case the

Answer 1

It is absolutely a micro-optimization. The whole reason for having functions in the first place is so that you make your code cleaner, more maintainable and more readable. Functions add a semantic boundary to sections of code. Each function should only do one thing, and it should do it cleanly. So if you find your functions performing multiple things at the same time, you've got a candidate for refactoring it into multiple routines.

Only optimize when you've got something working that's too slow (If it's not working yet, it's too early to optimize. Period). Remember, nobody ever paid extra for a program that was faster than their needs/requirements...

Edit: Considering that the program isn't finished yet, it's also a premature optimization. Why is that bad? Well, first you're spending time working on something that may not matter in the long run. Second, you don't have a baseline to see if your optimizations improved anything in a realistic sense. Third, you're reducing maintainability and readability before you've even got it running, so it'll be harder to get running than if you went with clean concise code. Fourth, you don't know if you'll need doMoreStuff somewhere else in the program until you've finished it and understand all your needs (perhaps a longshot depending on the exact details, but not outside the realm of possibility).

There's a reason that Donnald Knuth said Premature optimization is the root of all evil...