1. Re: 2.6 feature request: foreach (off topic)
Robert Craig wrote:
<snip>
> PureBASIC linked lists vs. Euphoria sequences:
>
> Did they tell you that each element of a PureBASIC linked list
> has a 4-byte pointer to "next", a 4-byte pointer to "previous"
> and probably at least 8 bytes of overhead for malloc?
>
> Did they tell you that to "SelectElement" item number one million,
> they might have to internally follow a chain of one million pointers
> in memory? i.e. after converting from sequences to PureBASIC lists,
> you might find your program running a *million* times slower,
Thanks for pointing this out clearly! That's actually what I had
assumed, but I was not sure.
> while each integer uses 20 bytes of space in memory?
Pfffffffffff ... 
> And there's no error checking, so if you ask
> for an invalid element, your program will likely crash.
>
> They of course have (inflexible) arrays:
>
> "Once an array is 'sized' it can be resized
> but its content will be deleted"
> (ouch!)
>
> "Arrays are always globally accessable in PureBasic."
> (no way to restrict access by scope!)
Pfffffffffff ...
Regards,
Juergen
