From: Alain F. <Ala...@in...> - 2005-03-06 00:15:17
|
Bardur Arantsson wrote: > I think there *might* be a problem with doing this. I don't remember the > details right now, but I do remember being quite sure it was actually > necessary to fill up using NULLs instead of copies. (Obviously it had > something to do with the extra references causing objects to hang around > for longer than necessary). I've thought about that, and I don't see any problem. Since the "used part" of the array is read-only, I don't see any problem. If the value used as an initializer is referenced through any cell of the array, then the first cell - which still contain the same value - is also referenced as well. -- Alain |