Bardur Arantsson wrote:
I think there *might* be a problem with doing this. I don't remember the
details right now, but I do remember being quite sure it was actually
necessary to fill up using NULLs instead of copies. (Obviously it had
something to do with the extra references causing objects to hang around
for longer than necessary).
I've thought about that, and I don't see any problem. Since the "used
part" of the array is read-only, I don't see any problem. If the value
used as an initializer is referenced through any cell of the array, then
the first cell - which still contain the same value - is also referenced
as well.
-- Alain
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
|
