Hi All,
    SparseLargeTable appears not to be sparse at all.  If you look
at SparseLargeTable>>initChunkSize:size:arrayClass:base:defaultValue: you'll
see tat each bin is initialized with an instance of the base class rather
than being filled lazily.  Further, instead of pvtNoCheckAt:put: lazily
creating an entry in each bin as needed it simply throws away the write if
the bin is empty.  Instead the usage pattern is to create fully-populated
instances and then make them sparse by sending zapDefaultOnlyEntries.

It seems to me
that SparseLargeTable>>initChunkSize:size:arrayClass:base:defaultValue:
should leave bins empty until pvtNoCheckAt:put: puts other than the default
value.  Since I want to create a sparse table with 2^32 entries the existing
approach won't work.

I wondered whether anyone else had already fixed this or whether there's a
good reason not to lazily initialize.

Best
Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20081101/804c77e8/attachment.htm