Maxence, hello. On 25 Nov 2011, at 13:04, Maxence Guesdon wrote:
> Thanks for your explanation. If I understand correctly: > - there is smal additional cost (memory and cpu) due to copying, Well yes, but no more than would be expected anyway in normal operation. A GC-based implementation would have object creating and copying being very cheap anyway. > - sharing is prevented. I'm not sure what you mean here. When the wrapper layer copies a librdf object it's done via a librdf function call, as Lauri mentioned. In many cases this will be implemented by incrementing a librdf-internal reference count, which means very little cost; and this wouldn't prevent sharing. The problem I mentioned in the other message came about because one of these librdf copy operations was accidentally a shallow copy rather than a deep one, and if I recall correctly may have been only a documentation bug. All the best, Norman -- Norman Gray : http://nxg.me.uk _______________________________________________ redland-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.librdf.org/mailman/listinfo/redland-dev
