On 2021-12-15 23:33:58 [+0200], Lasse Collin wrote: > Yes. It's fairly simple from implementation point of view but is it > clear enough for the users, I'm not sure. > > I suppose the alternative is having just one limit value and a flag to > tell if it is a soft limit (so no limit for single-threaded case) or a > hard limit (return LZMA_MEM_ERROR if too low for even single thread). > Having separate soft and hard limits instead can achieve the same and a > little more, so I think I'll choose the two-value approach and hope it's > clear enough for users.
The value approach might work. I'm not sure if the term `soft' and `hard' are good here. Using `memlimit' and `memlimit_threaded' (or so) might make more obvious and easier to understand. But then this just some documentation that needs to be read and understood so maybe `softlimit' and `hardlimit' will work just fine. > I was hoping to get this finished by Christmas but due to a recent sad > event, late January is my target for the next alpha release now. I hope > to include a few other things too, including some of Jia Tan's patches > (we've chatted outside the xz-devel list). Thank you for understanding. Okay. Sebastian
