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.



Reply via email to