46081Re: Vim 7 performance notes
- Feb 10, 2007Hi Bram Moolenaar, you wrote:
>I chose 8192/16384 pair because it's the closest to original 10000 bytes. 10000 itself would also be fine but I like round numbers...
> It sounds like keeping only 1024 bytes would already work for most
> situations. That would be an acceptable amount to keep allocated at
> all times. So why don't we use this as the initial size, and when it
> grows larger we free it when finished. The growth size can be doubled
> each time perhaps.
The patch with changes which, I think, close to what you describe above is attached. Could you please take a look at it?
> Right, this may happen and stack size wil greatly depend on the line
> That's very useful, thanks for diving into this.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>