Re: Introducing "Array Of" RFC

On 1/19/14, 11:31 PM, Patrick Schaaf wrote: > Regarding the N*M checking complexity, couldn't a little bit of memory > alleviate the problem? > > For each array, have a "member type" pointer, initially NULL. > > When the member type needs to be checked for the first time, and that > "member type" pointer is not already set, do an O(N) scan of the arrray, > testing compatibility of all members against the hinted type. Error on > mismatch, but when all members match, remember the type behind the "member > type" pointer. > > When the member type needs to be checked and the "member type" pointer _is_ > set, just compare it to the hinted type O(1). > > There must be some overhead when elements are added to an array. Either > "when member type is set, forget it", or even "when member type is already > set, check compatiility of the newly added element with the member type, > and then remove member type on mismatch or keep it on match". This means every HT becomes larger now and every time you write to a HT you at the very least need to do one extra comparison. We use HTs everywhere, so this would have a performance impact on every script even if you have absolutely no intention of ever using this feature. -Rasmus

Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] OpenPGP digital signature signature.asc