On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 09:46:53 +1000 Lex Trotman elextr@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 April 2013 03:19, Dimitar Zhekov dimitar.zhekov@gmail.com wrote:
Let me confirm. [...] you expect that a plugin will allocate a resource the first time it needs it, and release the resource as soon as it doesn't need it any more (as opposed to, say, reserving a resource based on the file type). Thus it's reasonable to expect that per-sci allocation will considerably the improve resource usage. Am I correct?..
For the record: [max usage 16/23 markers, 0/28? indicators]
Nothing wrong with your math, but the suggestion was started by talking to someone who is writing *another* plugin that wants to use markers, and the next one etc.
The math was for the record only; I really wanted to know if we expect the resource management described above. It looks nice, and certainly matches numberedbookmarks, but is not convinient for scope (and probably debugger).
Certainly we can be authoritative and assign a range to the current plugins that are in G-P, but thats not all plugins, and how do we manage it?
I suggested that as a fastest resolution only. Resource management may be required in the future, but the ability to allocate markers globally will be helpful. Or at least some resource ID manager, otherwise each plugin has to attach it's own key/data pairs for each sci, like William did.