At 5:38 PM +0200 5/10/02, Peter Gibbs wrote:
>The result is that the last header of a COWed string will still believe that
>the buffer is shared until a GC collection run occurs, and therefore could
>result in buffers being copied unnecessarily. Your system eliminates this
>problem; however, I believe that Dan may be averse to using a linked list -
>we'll see.
As long as there's no externally visible signs of the COW stuff, I
don't care as long as the code's commented well enough to be
maintained. I'd prefer commits of the code to be done only when
there's a demonstrable win to the committed code, though. (Which is
to say "No checking in code that slows things down")
If you want to take an intermediate step, it's fine to mark
substrings that don't start at the beginning of a buffer with an
extra flag of some sort (BUFFER_COW_substring_FLAG or something) that
caused the GC system to make a clean copy when it ran through the
buffer pool and collected, though that has issues of properly gaguing
how much memory's needed for the new pool.
--
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
