michael at sparta.mainstream.net
Thu Aug 14 18:43:54 New Zealand Standard Time 1997
clawrenc at cup.hp.com wrote:
> Another address to the too-many-objects-at-a-location problem is to
> make the list of objects at a location instead a table of hashed
But what about the memory overhead of an empty hashtable? Linked lists
can be better, for small numbers of objects...
There is a nice solution to this problem that uses C++. By using an
abstract object container class (one which defines the interface with
the rest of the code), we can change from linked-list storage to
hashtable storage to any other kind of storage without having to change
the outside code.
This way, if a linked-list container gets too full (more than X
objects), it will automagically transfer its contents to a hashtable
container-- and back, if the objects go away.
HOWEVER, I don't know if this will work with Java... (which is what he
said he wrote it in?)
Michael Hohensee michael at sparta.mainstream.net
Finger me for my PGP Public Key, or use:
More information about the MUD-Dev