On 14 October 2016 22:41:25 CEST, Janne Blomqvist <blomqvist.ja...@gmail.com> 
>On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 8:01 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
><rep.dot....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 13 October 2016 22:08:21 CEST, Jerry DeLisle
><jvdeli...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>On 10/13/2016 08:16 AM, Janne Blomqvist wrote:
>>>> Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
>>>Yes, OK, clever! Thanks!
>> Is 32 something a typical program uses?
>Probably not. Then again, wasting a puny 32 bytes vs. the time it
>takes to do one or two extra realloc+copy operations when opening that
>many files?

Every reallocated I'm aware of uses pools.

>> I'd have started at 8 and had not doubled but += 16 fwiw.
>I can certainly start at a smaller value like 8 or 16, but I'd like to

Yes please.

>keep the multiplicative increase in order to get O(log(N))
>reallocs+copys rather than O(N) when increasing the size.

Bike-shedding but if she's going to use that many units O(log(N)) will be 
nothing compared to the expected insn storm to follow. Inc by max(initial 
value, 64, let's say - short of double initial value - is still overestimated 
Thanks for taking care of this either way.

Reply via email to