On 1/20/06 1:46 PM, John Stiles didst favor us with:
> Something seems a little fishy about this situation to me.
> A decently-implemented set should have O(log n) properties.
I agree. This one doesn't appear to have a decent implementation. ;-) The
numbers I saw were clearly not O(log n).
> What's the plist generation code doing here?
> I guess I could look it up in CoreFoundation... :|
Please do. I'd be interested in your thoughts.
Larry
>
>
> Stuart Smith wrote:
>> Larry,
>> we had a similar problem.
>>
>> First of all, I would take this statement to heart, as we did:
>> " For situations where you need to store small amounts of persistent data,
>> less than a few hundred kilobytes, Core Foundation provides property lists."
>> this is from the "Introduction to Property Lists" at
>> http://developer.apple.com/documentation/CoreFoundation/Conceptual/CFPropert
>> yLists/index.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/10000130i.
>>
>> We write very large xml structures by hand, bypassing CoreFoundation. To
>> save space on disk we compress them using zlib. It is built into the system,
>> extremely easy to use and very fast (much faster than the binary property
>> list routines, even for moderately-sized lists).
>>
>> hth, Stuart
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Carbon-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/carbon-dev/email@hidden
This email sent to email@hidden
