On Jun 12, 2013, at 3:01 AM, Oleg Krupnov <oleg.krup...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You misunderstood, I wasn't talking about RAM. It was merely an > illustration of how an assumption that seemed justified basing on some > then current technical limits, in hindsight turned out ridiculous and > crippling after the technical limits were pushed further. It’s not a technical limit, it’s a mathematical limit. An n-bit address space simply cannot hold 2^n pointers. (I think the limit is 2^(n - n/8) … but of course even at that limit you wouldn’t have room for any objects for the pointers to point to!) If you want to implement a sparse array that can support 2^64 items, go for it, but you’ll need some mechanism other than NSNotFound to indicate when a value isn’t found. —Jens _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
