On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Stefan de Konink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matt Amos wrote: >> ah well, thats the price you pay for being able to easily write code >> without having to manage memory manually (or stick shared_ptr<> all >> over the place). there is a bug in there too, i think, which results >> in libxml not fully free()ing all the memory it is using. > > Come on you can give better arguments than that :)
but i don't need to :-) > C/C++ is not a prototype language. do you mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-based_programming ? > You will need to have your functional diagrams ready before start > 'scripting'. So I don't mind pointers, and in this case my webserver's api > takes care of the string management, so I am a happy coder :) i don't mind pointers either, but i know a lot of people who do. C++ is a powerful and complex language, which takes a long time to learn to use properly. in an open-source project, this means either potential contributors are excluded, or that they submit poorly-written code. of course, its possible for any developer to make a mistake, but at least in ruby it is less likely to cause a colossal failure. >> how did you optimise it? (other than converting ways to relations)? > > Not using MySQL, but MonetDB. It uses column based storage. interesting. the web site describes it as an in-memory database, but i assume it can store to disk as well. so why is everyone still using mysql / postgres / oracle? > Jup, but extra mathematical overhead in query generation that should not be > forgotten. Every output has to be atoi -> double back. And in the case of > storing doubles/floats the input can directly be passed to the user. I need > to figure out if the overhead of data translation is not bigger than > querying speed. to be fair, the latency between here and the states is about 150ms, so you may not need to optimise further. cheers, matt _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
