[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers
From: |
Michael Koch |
Subject: |
Re: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers |
Date: |
Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:38:02 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.6.2 |
Am Donnerstag, 18. November 2004 14:25 schrieb Jeroen Frijters:
> Michael Koch wrote:
> > Can you provide us with numbers that prove this ?
>
> I could give some IKVM numbers, but I don't see how that would
> prove anything. It's obviously highly VM specific.
>
> Do you have any strong objection against using subclasses to
> distinguish between writable and read-only buffers? The rational is
> pretty simple, since we already pay for virtual method invocation,
> we might as well make use of it to get rid of an additional test.
Not really. It just keeps the numbers of places lower where too look
when a bug needs to get fixed. But for speed it will be surely better
to use different classes for read-only and read-write.
Can we agree that you commit your patch when mine is in ? Or shall I
take your patch and build it into my patch ?
Michael
--
Homepage: http://www.worldforge.org/
- [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers, Michael Koch, 2004/11/18
- RE: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers, Jeroen Frijters, 2004/11/18
- RE: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers, Jeroen Frijters, 2004/11/18
- RE: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers, Jeroen Frijters, 2004/11/18
- RE: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers, Jeroen Frijters, 2004/11/18
- Re: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers,
Michael Koch <=
- RE: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers, Jeroen Frijters, 2004/11/18
- RE: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers, Jeroen Frijters, 2004/11/18
- RE: [cp-patches] [Patch] support for direct buffers, Jeroen Frijters, 2004/11/21