>> There wouldn't be a hole if the vector of arena base addresses were >> statically allocated. [David Abrahams] > This could be a reason to use the 2-level arena vector we were > discussing earlier. I was just assuming you wouldn't ever want to > reallocate it or move anything that big... A 2-level vector would complicate the code in ways that slow it down in the usual cases, so is unattractive. These vectors are generally *small*: on a 32-bit box, 1024 bytes of base-address vector is enough for that over 4 = 256 base addresses, which is enough to cover 2*8 * 2**18 = 64 megabytes of arena memory. Most programs will never go above that, and a one-time cost of moving 1KB per 64MB is trivial. It's quite attractive to just let the old vectors leak.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4