[DGD] Re: Substituting LWOs for persistent objects

[Mikael Lind]

Hello,

2006/12/20, Par Winzell <zell at skotos.net>:
> They use a 16-byte identifier for each object. That would probably
> double the size of the avarage LWO, and the lookup-time would be
> non-trivial too.

I was under the impression that LWOs inherit the auto object, which
means that under the Kernel Library, they use quite a lot of space
from scratch for the creator string etc. Am I mistaken?

Your post still made me reconsider, and I now plan to replace or
complement my currently implemented object name scheme with an object
number scheme. I intend to use the most significant bits for a unique
owner ID, and the least significant bits for a per-owner unique object
ID. This is assuming that objects cannot change owner once created.
Distinct LWOs will still expose a negative object number of -2 or
less.

Regards,
Mikael