John, > Or if you want to use a "real" language, use Felix, where "inline" > isn't a hint.
Can't blame you for marketing your product, but does it run under the NetBurner Eclipse IDE to produce code for a Coldfusion Freescale processor? :-) And call C language library code from NB too? And can you supply a C-to-Felix translator that's 100% bulletproof? (Wouldn't surprise me if you could. :-) And overcome the inertia here among people resistant to new platforms and languages? >> I vaguely recall (this was > 10 years ago) discussing multi-index >> operations like this. I know I actually WROTE code that batch-created >> (inserted) a Judy1/L array rather faster than by simple iteration, and >> it worked fine, but I don't know where it is today. > Actually that would be quite useful. I actually use Judy as a > temporary data structure. The GC algorithm is basically: find all > reachable objects, then delete everything not reachable. Doug, can you send him the "valid" copy of that code, or should I try to dig it up? I don't even recall what it was called... JudyLInsBatch(), etc, maybe? > All-reachable is a set of pointers (Judy) constructed by scanning. > Everything-not-reachable is a set of pointers. Also Judy. This is > constructed because the practice is to run finalisers on all these > objects *first* before deallocation. OK. > Just an option for two words would be useful. > > Why? Why stop at two words? :-) > Well, there is a serious bug/misconception in the Judy build. > Actually, the Felix clone makes the same mistake. > > I'm running on a 32 bit machine. I build only 32 bit Judy. Stupid. > I still need 64 bit integers. > > I'm running on a 64 bit machine. I build 64 bit Judy. Stupid. I > still need "int". That's only 32 bits. Heck, "long" is only 32 bits > on Win64. I see, having to bind the library to one size or the other is hobbling. > What should be built is: 32 and 64 bit arrays. On BOTH 32 and 64 bit > machines. I think you can, but not sure how they'd coexist -- namespace issues. > In the C++ Standard they're called NTBS: Null terminated byte > strings. So that's a technical, formal, and standardised name for "C > strings" :-) I'll try to remememember that. :-) > This is similar to the property naive Hash-table has. You lose > ordering in return for O(1) operations. Yup. Cheers, Alan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second resolution app monitoring today. Free. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Judy-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/judy-devel
