On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 11:44:21 -0500 "Stewart, Robert" <Robert.Stewart@sig.com> wrote:
Certainly it could be done without CoW. In an earlier iteration, I had a special subclass for that specific purpose [...]
The difference, as I see it, is that what I suggested is only used when it is needed and there is no reference counting involved. With COW, you force the reference counting on all internals code. There may be something about the algorithms I don't know, particularly since I haven't spent any time studying their code, but I think this will obviate the need for COW in the internals.
I still haven't proven that CoW will remain beneficial once I've made some of the suggested changes. If it is, I'm not sure that removing it would be a good idea. If not, I'll likely dig up that earlier subclass. -- Chad Nelson Oak Circle Software, Inc. * * *