On 5/19/06, Daniël Mantione <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Op Fri, 19 May 2006, schreef Micha Nelissen: > On Fri, 19 May 2006 18:29:29 +0100 > Peter Vreman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There are already some complains about the memory usage. Increasing the > > string size adds a lot more overhead. Especially for all the small labels > > like .L1 etc. Already using longstrings will add 3 bytes for the length > > alsomost doubling the size from 4 to 7 bytes. > > Don't shortstrings always use 256 bytes of memory ? It depends on wether they are stored in a variable of type "string", or allocated on the heap with a "Pstring". In all data structures where memory usage is an issue, the memory friendly Pstring is used. Still, because the compiler uses a lot of short strings, the internal heap data structures are an important factor in the memory usage of these strings. Daniël
Forgive me if I'm saying BS but it's been about 10 years since I programmed in TurboPascal (and used ShortStrings), but don't ShortStrings use the size they are declared with? And 255 is just default size (if no size is specified)? -Flávio _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
