Don: > However, the other case which is interesting is when BigInt is replaced > with FixedInt!n (maybe someone can come up with a better name for this?) > -- an integer with a length of a fixed number of ints. > Unlike BigInt, this has basically the same semantics as built-in integer > types. In fact, FixedInt!1 == int, FixedInt!2 == long, FixedInt!4 == cent. > This is possibly even more relevant for Rational. I haven't thought much > about the implications though. > > > BTW, does BigInt over-allocate initially to allow certain operations > > (like +=) to be done in-place more frequently? > > No, it doesn't. As long as it uses copy-on-write, there's no benefit to > doing so. > Reference counting would clearly be superior for FixedInt, but I'm not > at all sure that it would be a win for BigInt. But of course FixedInt > wouldn't need to over-allocate.
Are FixedInt fully allocated on the stack? Bye, bearophile
