http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3763
--- Comment #3 from Andrei Alexandrescu <and...@metalanguage.com> 2010-02-01 22:30:44 PST --- (In reply to comment #2) > Well, the problem is pretty clear. It's in std.stdio.readlnImpl(). In the > unbuffered I/O routine in the DIGITAL_MARS_STDIO version block, we basically > do > the following in pseudocode: > > buf = readNext64Bytes(); > buf ~= readRest(); // Recurse. That's Walter's code :o). > We're effectively prepending to our result in 64-byte increments. Ouch. > Therefore, > buf is reallocated once for every 64 bytes once we hit unbuffered I/O. Also > note that the use of O(N) stack space causes stack overflows for very long > lines (around 700 KB+). > > The problem is that, from looking at the rest of the code, all the other > routines for different OS's and I/O libs are implemented the obvious way, > using > plain old array appending, which makes me believe that this one is different > for a (unknown to me and probably relatively obscure) reason. Why was the > unbuffered I/O routine in the DIGITAL_MARS_STDIO version block coded in such > an > odd way in the first place? I recall Walter wrote that code, and he wrote it in a hurry. We were under deadline pressure. I personally find that code extremely bulky and difficult to follow, and would like to see it simplified. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
