[chuck-users] variables and memory
signal.automatique at gmail.com
Fri Mar 20 17:12:35 EDT 2009
> In theory, the above seems like a huge limitation. In practice, I
> find that there are other bugs and things that I generally have to
> fight long before I get annoyed about garbage collection. ;-)
I agree with this, it's also what I found.
Still; in many cases I end up defining the variables outside of the loop
(but inside of the class or function) and where we'd normally instantiate
them I reset them to 0. I'm not religious about this as often it's not worth
the trouble but for tight, continual loops in long term projects I do it and
sometimes even go as far as recycling the variables I use for "for" loops.
Most of the time this won't matter but it gives me some peace of mind,
knowing I'm safe from running out of memory in live performance. Actually I
find this peace of mind matters more than the actual memory footprint; I
haven't ever run out of memory in practice. Considering modern OS's and
swap-files I think you'd run into other issues before you actually ran out
of memory. I really don't think the average OS is going to be happy with a
modern HD that consists entirely of a swap-file... I'm not sure where or how
it would go wrong, and if you don't mind I'm not going to try it out either
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the chuck-users