> * Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-13 11:13:38 -0700]:
>
> Sam Steingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> * Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-12 20:57:11 -0700]:
>>> That is pretty easy, so I went ahead and wrote up a patch.
>>> Please try out the following and see if it does what you
Sam Steingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> * Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-12 20:57:11 -0700]:
>> That is pretty easy, so I went ahead and wrote up a patch.
>> Please try out the following and see if it does what you want:
>>
>> commit a012b399fc9ec00d3f27ffcfd25729053791d42f
>> Author:
> * Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-12 20:57:11 -0700]:
>
> Sam Steingold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Hello? is anyone there? do you only talk to each other?
>
> You would probably get better results by proposing a patch or by
> asking a particular person.
OK - I am both proposing a
> Eh? Even in that case it's O(n). Proof: Let n be the sum of lengths of the
> arguments. Let 1/q (0 < q < 1) be the growth factor. Then
> - the number of byte copies from the argument strings to working memory is
> exactly = n,
> - the number of zeroed bytes and of copied bytes spent in re
