Re: pseudo-specs for a String class

2008/8/27 Amos Jeffries <squid3_at_treenet.co.nz>:

> memory region doesn't. A string is generally a representation of
> printable data; a memory region isn't."
>
> .. particularly that last sub-sentence.

> Um, and per your:
> " Would you use a "String" as the reference counted type for say, the
> memory store? "
>
> Yes. I would. I really don't like Java, but their object serialization
> concept can be made very efficient for specific cases like HTTP Header
> storage. Completely removing any duplicate parsing (speed!) on load of
> object bytes from disk etc.

Well sure, and we need to do something long-term about the header vs
reply body storage in store objects, but thats a later problem.

Parsing the HTTP headers should be a bloody quick process.

> Minimal size cost is disk space of ((2xINT + PTR)*N + INT) though, where N
> is the number of tokens in the array of Strings. +(PTR * H + INT) if its
> done as a full tree (where H == header count).

But you miss my earlier point - would you use _string_ for storing the
_reply_ information in the memory store? The reply headers? sure. The
reply body chunks? :)

Adrian
Received on Wed Aug 27 2008 - 13:49:52 MDT