waterfall performance #40
Description
I did some performance testing and noticed that waterfall has quite a bit more overhead than series (about 5x). I would guess it's because it uses nextTick between each step in the waterfall.
Is nextTick there to prevent the call stack from growing out of control? I think you can call the next step directly, but keep track of how many calls have been made in the waterfall, and once it reaches are certain point (around 50?), dispatch the next call using nextTick. That should reduce the overhead associated with nextTick and still prevent the call stack from growing out of control.