> (tail call elimination is different than proper tail calls). I'm not sure I follow. What is the distinction here?
Take a look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_management#DYNAMIC. No one is really hanging on to previously freed space (except for the allocator, or if you're using a custom object pool allocation scheme)…
Was just going to comment prior to your edit, but we really should compare rates of occurrance rather than population size.
> It's equivalent to the SQL JOIN... Don't you mean GROUP BY?
This sounds similar to the technique used in the integer-only version of bresenham's line drawing algorithm.
Sounds like an amazing journey. Congrats on all the hard work.
It's spinning in the right direction. We're just inside the earth :).
Just delete the line. It should revert back to the default theme.
How much worse peformance-wise would generating PIC be to address this?
> (tail call elimination is different than proper tail calls). I'm not sure I follow. What is the distinction here?
Take a look here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_management#DYNAMIC. No one is really hanging on to previously freed space (except for the allocator, or if you're using a custom object pool allocation scheme)…
Was just going to comment prior to your edit, but we really should compare rates of occurrance rather than population size.
> It's equivalent to the SQL JOIN... Don't you mean GROUP BY?
This sounds similar to the technique used in the integer-only version of bresenham's line drawing algorithm.
Sounds like an amazing journey. Congrats on all the hard work.
It's spinning in the right direction. We're just inside the earth :).
Just delete the line. It should revert back to the default theme.
How much worse peformance-wise would generating PIC be to address this?