develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from October 2001

Re: Clamp, wherefor art thou

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Jeffrey Friedl
October 30, 2001 12:39
Re: Clamp, wherefor art thou
Message ID:

It seems that my posts are not reaching p5p, so I'm trying again via
another route.......

Nick Ing-Simmons <> wrote:
|> >[*]The way the counts are implemented in the patch I just submitted is
|> >fairly light weight (one extra integer increment per hash element addition
|> >or subtraction), 
|> and an extra word (8%) in every hash header. If I have millions of hash
|> based objects that is fair amount of extra memory.

That word was removed in the updated core-only patch I submitted earlier
today, responding to Tim's comment that an existing field could be used.

I don't see that the updated patch ever made it to p5p. On
I see a number of "Message not available" in this thread which seem to
correspond to the messages I've sent. Does anyone have any idea why my
messages would be stripped?

Later in the thread, Nick went on to say:

|> Arthur Bergman <> writes:
|> >
|> >> So we have the semantics defined for the existing SvREADONLY bit,
|> >> we allow HE/Nullsv for allowed-but-not-existing.
|> >> (I assume that delete $hash{'foo'} for a %hash with SvREADONLY
|> >> leaves the HE and sets its SV * to Nullsv as proposed.)
|> >>
|> >
|> >Or we add this to the core. It would be a rather small addition.
|> I am would be quite happy if patches to implement above were applied.
|> I will even add it to my todo queue if noone else gets there first.

This is exactly what my patch does (except that I use PL_sv_undef instead
of Nullsv, since you'll find that using Nullsv will get you into a lot of
trouble.) Perhaps this was missed because some of my messages didn't get

Hoping this gets through......

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About