Hi,
David Rowley <dgrowle...@gmail.com> writes: > Given that the code original code was written in a very deliberate way > to avoid reallocations, I now think that we should maintain that. > > I've attached a patch which adds bms_replace_members(). It's basically > like bms_copy() but attempts to reuse the member from another set. I > considered if the new function should be called bms_copy_inplace(), > but left it as bms_replace_members() for now. I find the following code in DiscreteKnapsack is weird. for (i = 0; i <= max_weight; ++i) { values[i] = 0; ** memory allocation here, and the num_items bit is removed later ** sets[i] = bms_make_singleton(num_items); } ** num_items bit is removed here ** result = bms_del_member(bms_copy(sets[max_weight]), num_items); I can't access the github.com now so I can't test my idea, but basiclly I think we may need some improvement here. like 'sets[i] = NULL;' at the first and remove the bms_del_member later. -- Best Regards Andy Fan