Would it be possible what Rony wants to achieve by treating the first omitted
argument as the end of the size arguments and pass any following ( after the
omitted one) on?
Ruurd
"Rony G. Flatscher" <[email protected]> schreef op 6 januari 2026
12:17:25 CET:
>On 06.01.2026 12:12, Rick McGuire wrote:
>> As currently implemented, no. The initial array is allocated as a single
>> piece of storage, which must be done before the INIT method is called. There
>> are some serious efficiency considerations there as arrays are extensively
>> used in internal operations. Delaying this would require two objects get
>> created for every array vs. the single object that is currently required.
>> Since the majority of arrays that are created never need to be expanded,
>> this would be a pretty severe performance hit.
>
>Thank you very much for this important information!
>
>---rony
>
>
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 5:52 AM Rony G. Flatscher <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> It appears that the NEW method of Array initializes (e.g. reserves the
>> memory for) an
>> array. Would
>> it be possible in principle to move initialization to Array's INIT
>> method?
>> (This way, a subclass of Array would become able to process (maybe
>> change) the arguments in
>> its INIT
>> method and then do a self~init:super(...).)
>>
>> If so, what would be the possible consequences?
>>
>> ---rony
>>
>> P.S.: Question related to <https://sourceforge.net/p/oorexx/bugs/2034/>.
>>
Ruurd J. Idenburg
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
