Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:17:15 06/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 2000 at 19:10:00, Bruce Moreland wrote: [snip] >Your question has already been answered, but I'd like to suggest that you >consider whether you need to use "new" at all. > >A lot of people think that heap allocation is a cost-free operation, and it >isn't. > >It's quite often something you have to do, but if you can get away with putting >the thing on the stack, it's better to do that. I would like to not only second this, but add a strange anecdote. I once wrote a sorting program that added strings into a linked list. I allocated memory for the strings as I read them and added them to the list. The malloc() profiler time was unbelievable. I tried a different approach. I read the whole file first, and then did the total allocation, and then read the file again. Reading the file twice was FASTER than individual malloc calls. I couldn't believe it. That was a long time ago (I seem to recall it was under OS/2 but that is not for sure). Anyway, malloc() and new can be incredibly costly.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.