For further references.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rich Talbot-Watkins <[email protected]>
Date: 2012/9/14
Subject: Re: Big arrays in C++
To: Carlos López González <[email protected]>
Ahhh that's a shame. But I'm not really so surprised. Only a few years
ago, many people weren't thinking of 64-bit compliance, mostly from
disbelief that anyone would ever want to allocate a block as big as 4Gb or
more! But of course, these days, 64-bit OSes are far more the normal thing.
When you're ready to have another go at it, another possible strategy could
be this -
Any public method which requires the parameter type to be changed (e.g. int
to size_t): don't change it, but instead overload it with a second fixed
version, and replace the original version with code which generates a
breakpoint or an assert, or at least something where you can see the
callstack. This way you can start to fix all calls which are made with the
wrong parameter type.
Good to meet you too, let me know if you make some progress!
Cheers,
Rich
On 14/09/2012 10:50, Carlos López González wrote:
> Hi Rich,
> Thanks again for your detailed reply. I spend some hours yesterday doing a
> simple little change from int to ptrdiff_t in the code of
> generic_pen::difference_type. The compiler complained to build in a huge
> amount of parts of the code. It seems that the solution isn't that trivial
> as I believed at first stage. It is a whole complete rework on the memory
> access of the synfig-core to make it 32-64 bit compliant.
>
> Currently I'm in the middle of another huge change that is add support for
> Cairo libraries in the synfig-core renderer of the application. It implies
> to make a new infrastructure of rendering that cannot be fully used until
> finished.
>
> The reason on trying to fix the huge image size handling bug was that it
> is a blocker for the Morevna Project (what is the current proof of pudding
> of Synfig) and I wanted to help them. Unfortunately the solution doesn't
> seems to be trivial and so I do prefer to take it apart and continue with
> the Cairo render implementation.
>
> So I've decided to give up on the 64-32 bit compliance bug and get back
> into Cairo-Synfig project.
>
> It was a pleasure to get your feed back on this matter and I count with
> you for further specific question on this and similar things.
>
> Nice to meet you! Cheers!
>
--
Carlos
http://synfig.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Got visibility?
Most devs has no idea what their production app looks like.
Find out how fast your code is with AppDynamics Lite.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;262219671;13503038;y?
http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html
_______________________________________________
Synfig-devl mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/synfig-devl
