home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!ogicse!reed!bowman
- From: bowman@reed.edu (BoBolicious)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
- Subject: Re: C array question
- Message-ID: <1993Jan12.225253.4470@reed.edu>
- Date: 12 Jan 93 22:52:53 GMT
- Article-I.D.: reed.1993Jan12.225253.4470
- References: <C0prG1.AsC@plato.ds.boeing.com> <1993Jan12.204011.26034@kronos.arc.nasa.gov>
- Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR
- Lines: 22
-
- In article <1993Jan12.204011.26034@kronos.arc.nasa.gov> joshr@kronos.arc.nasa.gov (Joshua Rabinowitz-Summer-91) writes:
- >In article <C0prG1.AsC@plato.ds.boeing.com> housen@plato.ds.boeing.com (Kevin housen/.na) writes:
-
- >> [Discussion about 2-d arrays omitted]
-
- >If you use NewHandle, you will have to lock them and only deal with
- >thier de-referenced ptrs. This is no gain.
-
- Huh?!? Most of the time, it makes sense to use handles, particularly if the
- the arrays are big or there are lots of other things going on. Then when you
- need to access a particular row, you lock it down and dereference into a local
- pointer. For anything real, it's well worth the effort, and with little
- performance loss.
-
- I changed the Distribution: to "world" That's where we live folks, it's more
- than just "usa".
-
- cheers,
- bobo In seeking the unattainable,
- bowman@reed.edu simplicity only gets in the way.
- "On Monday, numbers floated everywhere, and the world was full of
- approximations." -- Spencer Heinz, _The Oregonian_, 1/5/93
-