On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 7:23 PM, William Leslie < [email protected]> wrote:
> 2010/10/15 Ben Kloosterman <[email protected]>: > > The main cons I see is besides the tree index/reference cost , each > > substring would need a field (which may be aligned to 4-8 bytes) or char > to > > indicate the encoding and the higher initial / final parse overhead. > > I think shap imagines that there are different types for leaf nodes > with different encodings, so the encoding is determined by the type/gc > tag. So a string with one encoding type would appear in memory as > > | utf-8 node tag + gc header | encoded data | > Close, but not quite. I would say that the *strand* encoding is as you describe, and a *string* is defined as a sequence of strands. shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
