On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:56:54 +0100, Dmitry Olshansky
<[email protected]> wrote:
12-Apr-2013 18:40, Manu пишет:
On 13 April 2013 00:18, Dmitry Olshansky <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Believe it or not, I'm not actually a fan of over-complexity.
And I'm
focusing here on totally unnecessary allocations.
Isn't using the stack where applicable just a whole low easier?
That's
what it's there for.
'cause nobody can tell you how big it is. This knowledge is only
available to end user and there is still no easy way to "tell" that
to the library. The end result is utterly useless as library can't
reliably use stack space.
Filenames, strings, etc have a fairly predictable size. Allocate
slightly above that, and fallback to the heap upon overflow.
I think it's safe to assume the stack is 'big enough' if you apply some
common sense.
Up to 32K on WinNT. Hence the 32K reference.
Sure, but that upper limit is practically never reached. I work for a
backup/archive company and we have to allow for paths of 32K length but I
can fairly confidently tell you that 80-90% are less than 1000 characters
long.
R
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
