On 6/6/17 8:34 AM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 June 2017 at 12:07:28 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On 6/6/17 6:36 AM, Stanislav Blinov wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 June 2017 at 09:57:31 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
No, 2 allocations instead of N.
Oh, I misunderstood you. You mean two blocks total, for scanned and
non-scanned data. This could indeed work for cases when more than two
arrays are needed. Still, it's one extra allocation.
True. But O(2) is better than O(N) :)
Heh, this isn't malloc. We could end up in a situation when even one
allocation is slower than N, depending on when they happen :)
Actually, separate blocks might be a decent choice: there's another
problem with sharing blocks for different data in that finalizers can't
be run. So such a function would either not support types with
finalizers at all, or would have to allocate separate blocks for such
types anyway. Don't know, need to actually implement and measure if it's
even worth the trouble.
Looking at your code, you have allocated separate blocks for the objects
and the bytes, but your objects still are just pointers (e.g. C.sizeof
== (void *).sizeof). You are allocating a new block for each class
instance anyway in the loop inside main.
I don't think there is any support in the GC to run the finalizers of an
array of class instances (read: an array of class instance storage that
you point at), so this whole exercise may be moot if you are using
classes :)
-Steve
