On 25 Oct 2018, at 16:10, Gabriel Ivăncescu gabrielopcode@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 5:58 PM Huw Davies huw@codeweavers.com wrote:
Not if you grow the alloc size exponentially.
Yeah, that makes sense, but are you sure you want me to do that? Here's my reasoning as to why:
Since this code is there and isn't *too* difficult as it is (I hope?), plus it's also better for the (eventual?) merge sort patch, since it's much more flexible than other sorts, so that would have to either be split later or make the pending patch a larger patch to change the realloc to the chain of blocks if we go with it. (it's friendly to the cache since it sorts pairs from the end first, the last items in the cache will be the first ones, where the sort will start from)
I *know* that currently it doesn't mean much, but it will be easier on me for later pending patches already done, that's why I'm asking/hoping to change your mind just on this one.
Yes, I'm sure. We can't have code in Wine just in case it's useful in the future.
Huw.