Damn you were faster.
Am 25.03.2017 07:57 schrieb "Alexander Burger" <a...@software-lab.de>:

> Hi Christopher,
>
> > (list (box) (box) (box))
> > ...
> > ($177760526373112 $177760526373114 $177760526373116)
>
> > Where each memory location is two more than the previous. I am wondering
>
> Yes. BTW, these are actually cell addresses, not bytes. The values have to
> be
> multiplied by 16 to get the physical addresses. And the value is printed in
> octal representation.
>
> Two cell are created for each symbol here, one for the symbol itself and
> one for
> the list being built.
>
>
> > if this behavior is guaranteed to always be the case, the implication
>
> The observed offset of two is not guaranteed. Cells are picked
> sequentially from
> the heap in the beginning, but from the Avail list after garbage
> collection, and
> are not predictable.
>
>
> > being one could have random access to any cell provided he knew the
> > address of the first cell.
>
> Correct. There is even a function for that, 'adr':
>
>    : (box)
>    -> $377166006651
>
>    : (adr @)
>    -> -34256457129
>
>    : (oct @)
>    -> "-377166006651"
>
> ♪♫ Alex
> --
> UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
>

Reply via email to