Re: New hash function

[LachlanA]

John W. Eaton wrote
> The dldfcn 
> directory is for functions that require external libraries that we would 
> prefer to avoid loading unless they are needed.  but if a function just 
> depends on functionality provided by libraries that are always loaded, 
> there is no particular advantage to making it a .oct file so it might as 
> well be always linked with Octave.

jwe,

Thanks for clarifying the role of the dld directory.

Doesn't making rarely-used functions .oct files reduce the memory footprint
by the size of that function?  That is a benefit for all applications that
don't use that function (i.e., the majority)?  What is the overhead of using
a .oct file instead of building the function in (either in time to load or
memory overhead once loaded)?

Lachlan



--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/New-hash-function-tp4674081p4674087.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.