>>There is a performance increase using a named constant. It's not evaluated at run-time. See message#268676. George Tasker came up with a test that shows this.
>
>
>Yes, this is kind of related to that thread about defining SYS() functions and other similar things, something that I would usually use a local for if only needed in one method, but now I'm wondering if a constant might be better. If it weren't for that debugger problem...

..and if you have a lot of constants it is another problem to remember:

that you have them
what-was-that-name-again?
and what the heck that constant value was...
:)