[Coldstuff] Waifs draft 2 (was: Re: First version of
waif-patch)
xmath
xmath@nubz.org
Sun, 6 Jan 2002 11:35:44 +0100
>So, we thought that it'd be easier to just make it possibly for the
>methods table to be NULL, only costing 4 bytes (by also moving
>idents and strings into a single structure for the method data).
Sounds very nice
unless you think that's too ugly, you could union it (since it's not
used for waifs) with something that's waif-only, like the cclass or
the usage count.
>Brad's mostly done implementing this into the current dev-tree.
>This has the advantage of also reducing the size of any object
>without any methods fairly significantly. (About 1316 bytes or so,
>per object.)
Nice, nice
>should significantly reduce the number of bugs
Actually, I found that changing the name of the struct was fairly
useful: it caused a lot of compile errors that forced me to check
every single occurrence for the impact of waifs.
>as well as the complexity of the patch that will be needed.
That is true.
>I'm sorry that this comes after your two efforts, but it looked like
>the cleanest way and I guess that Brad was bored and in the mood to
>do the implementation work on that part of it.
Don't worry, I sometimes throw away many versions of my own work
until I'm satisfied with it. I'm just trying to get waifs done in a
hurry because I need 'em for trying out other ideas. :)
>If this works for you as an implementation basis, let's talk about
>some of the rest of the changes. I think that this may make some of
>them easier with an object and waif using the same data storage.
Yes, definitely. Until the dev release is available, I'll work on other things.
- xmath