Re: $recycler, $garbage, etc

• Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 04:14:24 PST
• From:
  Kipp the Kidd <mcmudge@mailbox.syr.edu>
• Cc: moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
• Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
• In-Reply-To: <2.2b7.32.19951205000456.006aa7b4@vv.com>

On Mon, 4 Dec 1995, Quinn wrote:

> Is there any reason to "recycle" objects (parent them to $garbage and re-use)
>  other than keeping down max_object()?  Is that benefit really anything but an
>  aesthetic one?
> 
> I'm thinking I'd have a lot less trouble on my MOO if I just used built-in
>  recycle() and create(): Quicker, less chance for blown creation and
>  destruction routines, no book-keeping problems with re-created objects.
> 
> I'd still use the $recycler wrappers, of course, to restrict use of the
>  builtins.  But, I repeat in closing, is there a good functional reason
>  to re-create?

I had this problem when I started my Minimal database.  I had always used
create() and recycle() until I realized that the holes were being created
and not removed... then I made a verb that properly renumbers objects
(updating props too) and changed all 'create()' to 'renumber(create())'. 
Got into lag problems when creatures died and exact copies of the creature
and contents were created in the corpse...  It got worse as max_object()
got above 3000.  Eventually, I saw the reason :) ...So that's my story. 
Decide for yourself. 

- Kipp

• $recycler, $garbage, etc
• From: Quinn <quinn@vv.com>

• Prev: $recycler, $garbage, etc
• Next: RE: $recycler, $garbage, etc
• Index: MOO-cows
• Thread: MOO-cows