Replies: 3 comments
|
I gave it a try, and in my use-case, there is indeed a huge improvement in RAM usage. It might not benefit the same for everyone, though. Here is the context:
The memory footprint penalty for this combination is huge:
The overall results:
Total savings: 20 KB flash, 20 KB RAM... |
0 replies
|
That seems good progress. |
0 replies
|
Will do, I just wanted first to check if anyone was interested or if it was just me... |
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
While working with frozen modules to save RAM, I noticed that a
fun_bcobject is still allocated in RAM for every defined method..If I am not mistaken, except in the cases where there are non-const default arguments, this object could also be frozen.
Would it make sense to add an LOAD_FUNCTION opcode that pushes a pre-cooked
fun_bcobject onto the stack, instead of using MAKE_FUNCTION which allocates it on the heap, or do you foresee a problem with that idea ?All reactions