id gladly trade a 10% increased chance of stack overflow if you can
save 5 bytes!

-igor


On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 5:09 AM, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> only the serialization output, not in memory.
>
>  But i guess i can revert that change so that we save 1 byte in the serial
>  output
>  Then we have now and then a stackoverflow under certain situations but i
>  guess that is way better yes..
>  Maybe i can change it that way that i only save 1 byte maybe, maybe other
>  things also will stop working then in certain situations
>  but then we can store a lot of pages!
>
>  /me starts calculating now how many then fit in a 500GB hd...
>
>  johan
>
>
>
>
>  On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Martijn Dashorst <
>  [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  > On 4/6/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > >  -                 <td valign="top" align="left" nowrap><span
>  > wicket:id="size">414 bytes</span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
>  > >  +                 <td valign="top" align="left" nowrap><span
>  > wicket:id="size">415 bytes</span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
>  >
>  > >  -                 <td valign="top" align="left" nowrap><span
>  > wicket:id="size">415 bytes</span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
>  > >  +                 <td valign="top" align="left" nowrap><span
>  > wicket:id="size">416 bytes</span>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
>  >
>  > You increased the memory usage! Heretic!!!
>  >
>  > Martijn
>  >
>  > --
>  > Buy Wicket in Action: http://manning.com/dashorst
>  > Apache Wicket 1.3.2 is released
>  > Get it now: http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.cgi/wicket/1.3.2
>  >
>

Reply via email to