On Jan 19, 2010, at 3:15 PM, Brice Goglin wrote: > > I say "bytes" instead of "kilobytes" because it might be easier to avoid > > getting into the "what does kilo mean -- 1000 or 1024?" arguments. > > kilo mean 1000, otherwise it's called kibi :)
Forgot to mention -- I think that comment proves the point right there. I would have never come up with "kibi" to mean "kilobytes". > But I am ok with changing all this into bytes or whatever. Perfect; I think that will be least ambiguous. > > Or maybe just total and local memory set to 0? > > Don't know. I thought having memory point to NULL when the object can > obviously contain no memory could help, but it's not a big deal. Ya, I'm still torn -- on one hand, saving a little memory is a good thing. On the other hand, it's nice to not have to put an "if" in just to calculate how much memory you have (i.e., if (ptr) size+=ptr->...). It might still be nice to have a total_descendants_memory field (or a shorter field) that represents the sum of all children memory since it is probably not an uncommon action to just want to know how much memory I can access *from this point in the hierarchy*. -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com
