Array length & allocation question

[Derek Parnell]

On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 05:33:33 +1000, Chris Nicholson-Sauls  
<ibisbasenji at gmail.com> wrote:

> Now, what I didn't test but probably should have, was the effect of  
> "pre-allocating" the array by setting the .length to a large value and  
> then back to zero, expanding the behind-the-scenes capacity of the  
> array.   I'm betting in that case the IndexAssign would be the faster.

Not if you set it back to zero. If you do that, D also deallocates the  
RAM. Setting its length back to 1 however is okay it that the allocated  
RAM stays allocated to the array. This means that the first element is  
just a dummy to get around the 'bug'.


-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia