On Mon, 15 Nov 2004, Ben Tilly wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:58:11 -0500, Aaron Sherman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 11:40:25 -0800, Ben Tilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:04:46 -0500, Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 13:22 -0800, Ben Tilly wrote:
[Massive snippage of two ships passing in the night]
> > > In Perl I'd expect it to be possible but fragile. If Parrot could make
> > > it possible and not fragile, that would be great.
> >
> > In parrot it's quite robust. Parrot supports "buffers" as core PMC
> > types. A buffer can refer to any part of memory with any read-only or
> > copy-on-write semantics you like.
>
> That would be nice.
>
> Incidentally will Parrot also support efficiently building strings
> incrementally? I like the fact that in Perl 5 it is O($n) to do
> something like:
>
> $string .= "hello" for 1..$n;
>
> In most other languages that is quadratic, and I'm wondering
> what to expect in Perl 6.
That's not O(n) in Perl 5, it's just smaller than O(n^2). The same's true
for Parrot -- we've got mutable strings and generally over-allocate, so
it's not going to be quadratic time. Neither, though, is it going to be
linear. Expect somewhere in between.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
_______________________________________________
Boston-pm mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/boston-pm
