On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Kelly Linden <ke...@lindenlab.com> wrote:
> > * In my mind the biggest issue is that mono scripts will appear 4x worse > than LSL scripts. This is really the reason I am hesitant to push a function > like this through before we have the ability for mono scripts to better > reflect how much memory they may use. We need more development time for any > solution on that front. Right now because a mono script could use 64k, that > is the only number we have available to count. Maybe it would be nice to > have an API to access number of scripts, number of LSL vs. Mono scripts, > amount of memory used and script time used. However we rapidly get away from > my desired philosophy of minimal interfaces. The vast majority of scripts are tiny utility things, and are only compiled as mono because that became the default a year or so back. In reality, the typical script is probably using much less than 16k. What about using 16k for both LSL and Mono until real Mono values and controls can be added later? This is probably closer to real memory use than the sum of maximums would be. -- Brian McGroarty | Linden Lab Sent from my Newton MP2100 via acoustic coupler
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
