<br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/31/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Matthew Flatt</b> <<a href="mailto:mflatt@cs.utah.edu">mflatt@cs.utah.edu</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> At Thu, 31 May 2007 16:31:28 -0700, YC wrote:<br>> > While it's unclear for me what model PLT Scheme uses for structs - Robby<br>> > alluded to that closures is only a constant factor over struct from memory
<br>> > consumption.<br><br>> I think that constant factor should be between 0 and 1 pointer,<br>> depending on whether the closure refers to top-level bindings or module<br>> top-level bindings (other than things that are built into MzScheme, in
<br>> which case the reference is inlined instead of kept in the closure).<br><br>> Otherwise, a closure has a pointer to its code, and a struct has a<br>> pointer to it's type descriptor, so those balance; each field and
<br>> captured bindings take the same amount of space.</blockquote><div><br>That's not bad at all... ;) <br><br>Thanks,<br>yinso <br></div></div><br>