>>I thought some time ago about the semantics of changes to the array
>>while iterating it.
>>The only sane solution was to unconditionally copy the array for the
>>iteration. Some other toughts?
>
> Indeed, you have a point. Copying must be avoided if possible if we want
> arrays of decent size to function well. A full reference counted
> implementation could manage this with minimal copying. Here we could use an
> iterator refcount which would allow us to detect a change being made to a
> (non-nested) array that's also the subject of iterations, and take action.
> Exactly what action, I haven't thought through yet!
Yes, in a full reference counted scheme, we could use copy-on-write
for the arrays, and therefore the unconditional copy for the iterator
is a no-op if the array will not be modified inside the iteration.

How far ist your refcnt patch, do you need any help?

Bert
>
> Tony
-- 
NEdit Develop mailing list - [email protected]
http://www.nedit.org/mailman/listinfo/develop

Reply via email to