[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: immediate strings #2
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: immediate strings #2 |
Date: |
Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:50:17 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111124 Thunderbird/8.0 |
On 11/28/11 18:07, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> There are bits available in size and size_byte, we
> have to use those (like we currently do with gcmarkbit in `size')
There is a bit available in size (since it's always nonnegative)
but not in size_byte (since it ranges from -1 .. PTRDIFF_MAX
and is a ptrdiff_t, assuming a 32-bit host configured --with-wide-int
and assuming the memory-saving patch of Bug#9874).
This is in contrast with our current uses of mark bits (e.g.,
ARRAY_MARK_FLAG), which use bits that are otherwise unused, even if
a vector has its maximal size.
We can fairly easily get that bit back from size_byte by restricting
its range to (say) 0 .. PTRDIFF_MAX.
So this is a fairly minor glitch that can be fixed but is not yet
fixed in the current proposal.
- Re: immediate strings #2, (continued)
- Re: immediate strings #2, Stefan Monnier, 2011/11/28
- Re: immediate strings #2, Andreas Schwab, 2011/11/28
- Re: immediate strings #2, Ken Raeburn, 2011/11/28
- Re: immediate strings #2, Andreas Schwab, 2011/11/29
- Re: immediate strings #2, Ken Raeburn, 2011/11/29
- Re: immediate strings #2, Andreas Schwab, 2011/11/29
- Re: immediate strings #2, Ken Raeburn, 2011/11/30
Re: immediate strings #2, Paul Eggert, 2011/11/28
- Re: immediate strings #2, Stefan Monnier, 2011/11/28
- Re: immediate strings #2, Dmitry Antipov, 2011/11/28
- Re: immediate strings #2,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: immediate strings #2, Dmitry Antipov, 2011/11/30
- Re: immediate strings #2, Paul Eggert, 2011/11/30
- Re: immediate strings #2, Ken Raeburn, 2011/11/30
- Re: immediate strings #2, Paul Eggert, 2011/11/30
Re: immediate strings #2, Dmitry Antipov, 2011/11/28
Re: immediate strings #2, Dmitry Antipov, 2011/11/29