2014-06-02 2:10 GMT+02:00 Denys Vlasenko <vda.li...@googlemail.com>: > Yes, this must not result in such significant growth. >
The problem is: such hashtable would have to be statically generated. Otherwise it would be built up from scratch on every start-up making the entire change pointless. The general consensus is that the size increase is not worth the negligible start-up speed improvement and I agree. On the other hand Busybox seems to have multiple independent hashtable implementations (awk, dpkg, inode_hash) and pulling these into libbb could decrease the size significantly. I'll see what I can do when I'll have some time. Best regards, Bartosz Gołaszewski _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list busybox@busybox.net http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
