FreeAmp really does have too large of a memory footprint. It is a shame
that the STL strings are such memory hogs. I think it is worth seeing how
big of an improvement his suggestion can bring. If it is not that much of
an improvement we drop it....right? If it is a big improvement we can all
hammer on it and track down any lingering issues...

Considering how late in the game Chris is jumping into the code I am
impressed by how quickly he is modifying the code and getting up to speed.
It is only natural for there to be bugs and issues when trying to make
such a large change. Let's give his idea a chance and as much support as
we can lend and see where we end up.

elrod

Valters Vingolds wrote:

> Hello Chris,
>
> Wednesday, September 27, 2000, 17:47:04, you wrote:
>
> CK> My changes to Metadata to use the HashStore for string storage
> CK> are far enough along to start thinking about getting someone else
> CK> to help test it.
>
> (sorry, haven't looked at it or compiled freeamp lately somehow - it's
> too much of moving target, i guess...;)
>
> Tell you what - I hear a lot from you how your patch segfaults and
> segfaults.
> I don't really hear how it saves megabytes and megabytes of memory.
>
> Do you really think introducing the unstability that will have to be
> debugged and cleaned up for months is absolutely beneficial?
>
> --
> Valters "WaTT" Vingolds
>
> _______________________________________________
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.freeamp.org/mailman/listinfo/freeamp-dev

_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.freeamp.org/mailman/listinfo/freeamp-dev

Reply via email to