Arlie Davis wrote:
> I have a few questions for the advanced CLR people here. I
> haven't been able to find any satisfactory answers elsewhere.
>
> Consider value types / structures in CLR, and passing them as
> arguments to methods. Does the MS CLR *always* copy the entire
> structure onto th
It is a value type.
But I think MS assumes that the function calls will be inlined anyway,
and the no copy ends up on the stack.
Thomas Tomiczek
THONA Software & Consulting Ltd.
(Microsoft MVP C#/.NET)
(CTO PowerNodes Ltd.)
> -Original Message-
> From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced
> This seems like a big waste of time
Arlie, are you concerned more about the time (ie, the memcpy operation) or
excess growth of the stack (eg, in recursive scenarios)? Or both?
I don't have the managed dx sdk handy -- is their Matrix really a valuetype?
In System.Drawing.Drawing2D, it's a clas
> While the implementation is close to what you describe, that
> really isn't relevant.
I guess I'm a pragmatist, in that I feel like shipped implementations are
more relevant than specs. :P
Seriously, nice catch. I agree, it does sound like a bug. It'll be
interesting to see if this bug gets
Hello There,
Thank U all previous response regarding the wait on threadpool issue.
Now, I am breaking my head , working with thread pooling and locking.
Algorithm :
1. StartAF
Keep in invoking Collector ( CollectAdapterMessages)
2.CollectAdapterMessages :
Create new thread to hand
Well, I understand all about boxing, and I appreciate the response. But
boxing has nothing at all to do with my question.
My question is -- what, *exactly*, does the JIT compiler do when it compiles
methods that take "large" structures as parameters? Is there a threshold
beyond which the JIT com
Copy, unless the parameter is passed by reference.
Thomas Tomiczek
THONA Software & Consulting Ltd.
(Microsoft MVP C#/.nET)
(CTO PowerNodes Ltd.)
> -Original Message-
> From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Arlie Davis
> Sent: Son
I'm not an expert... BUT.. I think I'm right..
If you're using C#, you can take advantage of boxing which takes a value
type and implicitly turns it into a reference type. I dotn know the larger
performance/memory implications of this, so the experts will surely give the
best practices on this.
I have a few questions for the advanced CLR people here. I haven't been
able to find any satisfactory answers elsewhere.
Consider value types / structures in CLR, and passing them as arguments to
methods. Does the MS CLR *always* copy the entire structure onto the stack?
Or does it ever simply p
Hi,
As far as I know, this is not as simple as it shows up in C#. In CLR there are
actually arrays and vectors, two similar but still different concepts. What we are
talking here (SomeClass[]) is vector and is handled with special IL commands. For
example, newarr creates vector and ldlen gets i
I disagree. While the implementation is close to what you describe, that
really isn't relevant. In the type system, there really are distinct
types for each array type.
I would argue that the behavior described by the original poster is in
fact a bug. The spec says (part. I 8.5.3.1 Visibility Of T
11 matches
Mail list logo
