3 ms·
I would definitely be in favor of an even faster `SmallBump` variant which assumes that the allocations are small w.r.t. usize::MAX for some additional speed.
by tel 3y ago
I would definitely be in favor of an even faster `SmallBump` variant which assumes that the allocations are small w.r.t. usize::MAX for some additional speed.
I also wouldn't mind the a default "fast" bump allocator library to do all tricks it can without sacrificing safety.
- lowbloodsugar 3y agoAnd maybe the heap has fixed alignment so you have one that only needs 4 and one that needs 16. Indeed maybe you grow from top and bottom depending. And maybe this is all a giant premature optimization - including the panic about up vs down. My previous career was console video games and maybe this kind of handwringing isn’t required for whatever the fuck this is.
- tel 3y agoEh, sure it is. Until it isn't. I'm not using this libraries, but I'm glad they exist.