On 31/01/2024 10:54, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 1:42 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote:
I spent some more time digging into this, experimenting with different
approaches. Came up with pretty significant changes; see below:
Hi Heikki,
I think this approach is good. As I wrote in the first email, I had
briefly considered reference counting, but at the time I figured there
wasn't much point if it's only ever going to be 0 or 1, so I was
trying to find the smallest change. But as you explained, there is
already an interesting case where it goes to 2, and modelling it that
way removes a weird hack, so it's a net improvement over the unusual
'owner' concept. +1 for your version. Are there any further tidying
or other improvements you want to make?
Ok, no, this is good to go then. I'll rebase, fix the typos, run the
regression tests again, and push this shortly. Thanks!
--
Heikki Linnakangas
Neon (https://neon.tech)
