back to arays

[Unknown W. Brackets]

Right, sorry if I was unclear.

When you resize an array, it makes a copy - it still doesn't move 
anything.  When I was talking about moving, I was meaning a compacting 
(defragmenting) garbage collector.

DMD's garbage collector holds onto any pointer references which are 
still active, even if you change the length of a dynamic array - so that 
issue shouldn't affect this.

For slices to work properly, the above must be guaranteed afaik.  But 
holding onto the memory around said slices need not be guaranteed.

PS: I've been called a lot of different things (Uncle Brackets, Big U, 
etc.), but I hadn't ever heard "W. Brackets".  Heh.

-[Unknown]


> Derek Parnell wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 May 2006 22:07:12 -0700, Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
>>
>>> I should note, currently, DMD's implementation won't move anything 
>>> you're pointing to.
>>
>> Even if the length is increased beyond the size that has been 
>> allocated for
>> a dynamic array? I thought that DMD allocated a new block of the right 
>> size
>> and copied data from the old block to it then released the old block back
>> to the GC.
>>  
> 
> Yes, that's what it does, but that resizing results from an explicit 
> programmer action, and not from the GC. When W. Brackets mentioned 
> "DMD's implementation" I believe he meant the GC only, which, as is 
> known, indeed doesn't currently move anything.