Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: November 2003:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6822) some variable-sized arrays
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6822) some variable-sized arrays

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: jdorje@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: (PR#6822) some variable-sized arrays
From: "Raimar Falke" <i-freeciv-lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 03:58:15 -0800
Reply-to: rt@xxxxxxxxxxx

<URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6822 >

On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 11:16:46PM -0800, Per I. Mathisen wrote:
> 
> <URL: http://rt.freeciv.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=6822 >
> 
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Raimar Falke wrote:
> > > The attached patch replaces some malloc'd arrays with variable-sized
> > > stack arrays.One memory leak is fixed in the process.
> > >
> > > This should be faster, but my tests didn't show a measurable difference
> > > (on systems with inefficient malloc calls this may make an impact - but
> > > then those systems aren'tlikely to compile C99 anyway).It's also
> > > safer and more legible.
> >
> > I don't see that the benefits (safer) outweigh the costs (change must
> > be done, compiler or other tools doesn't understand it).
> 
> We already use such arrays elsewhere.

We do? A quick grep didn't found cases.

> This might have considerable speed impact on win32 platform, since I hear
> malloc is extremely slow there, and this patch removes _a lot_ of mallocs.

Can we replace this hearsay with some facts? It turned out false for
Linux.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  "brand memory are for windows users that think their stability
   problems come from the memory"
    -- bomek in #freeciv




[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]