Should size be extended to variables?
ambassador at fourthworld.com
Sat Aug 20 15:05:20 EDT 2016
Mark Waddingham wrote:
> On 20 Aug 2016, at 18:01, Mark Talluto wrote:
>> On Saturday, August 20, 2016, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>>> Any other options I should consider before submitting a request for
>>> some means of determining data length in bytes?
>> Yes. Arrays.
> For what purpose?
> The key thing here is that the number of bytes a value currently
> takes up in memory is not actually a good measure for how much memory
> is being used because instances of values can be shared.
> To put it another way, the memory footprint used by two arrays will
> not necessarily be the same as the sum of the memory footprint of the
> two arrays measured separately as they might share the actual memory
> used by any value in either array. e.g the values used to store the
> keys in an array are *always* shared.
Would that apply across sub-arrays? e.g., given:
...would "Name" and "EmpID" use the same string in memory?
As for byte sizes, my own use case is for establishing pointers to
locations within a large file on disk.
But as Richmond kindly reminded me, the byte chunk type supports that
with "the number of bytes of...", so I'm set for now.
> For optimization purposes the best approach is to measure the amount
> of memory *actually* in use before and after any particular operation
> you perform - just as you do with time when profiling for speed
> (rather than memory footprint).
Is there some built-in way to get the amount of memory in use, or are
you thinking of shell calls there?
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
Ambassador at FourthWorld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com
More information about the Use-livecode