GvR wrote: > > But the question is incredibly ill-defined, so it's not clear that > Raymond will be able to calculate a useful answer. (See Tim's post.) Even a simple measure which double-counted everything might be useful to me. Or perhaps a simple measure which counted only memory that would be freed by destroying this object. I am after all looking for a needle (excessive memory usage) which is two orders of magnitude bigger than the hay (memory usage that I am sure I want). I don't know what the very *best* kind of answer would be. Perhaps a recursively defined "weight", where an object which holds the *only* reference to another object carries the weight of that other object, and an object which holds one of K references to another object carries 1/Kth of its weight. I'm not sure that would be useful, but it might be. Regards, Zooko http://zooko.com/ http://mnet.sf.net/
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