Re: Profiling Under Windows & String Size
- Posted by Kat <KSMiTH at PELL.NET> Aug 04, 1999
- 499 views
----- Original Message ----- From: Lucius L. Hilley III <lhilley at CDC.NET> To: <EUPHORIA at LISTSERV.MUOHIO.EDU> Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 8:19 PM Subject: Re: Profiling Under Windows & String Size > 1st your 1 gig HD is puny by todays standards. I picked the size at random, anyone's hd size wasn't the point of my email, it's irrelevant, would you have been more biting if i had said i know someone running linux on a 286 and a 20 meg hd? > 2nd it isn't th HD space we are trying to conserve. I know that, but Eu will virtualize all the memory you need on the hd, or am i mistaken? > Assume that this new byte scheme BLOATS Euphoria into the > 800 KB realm. So now as Rob says, You are WASTING 80 KB more > than you where before. Assume you have written a program that > under the old scheme abused 16,000 KB of memory. But, using > the new byte scheme you could store the same amount of data > using only 4,000 KB. This frees up 12,000 KB of memory. > When you are freeing up 12,000 KB who cares about the 80 KB > wasted? While you try to lock Euphoria into 8 bits per character, i'd like to refer everyone else to http://www.unicode.org/ , where the standard is 16 bits, for the reasons i gave earlier. Kat.