this post was submitted on 01 Jan 2026
143 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

24318 readers
263 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

22 characters is significantly less useful than 255 characters.

You can still use more than 22 characters; it just switches to the heap.

nothing I am going to store is ever going to require heap allocations

I would put good money that using 256 bytes everywhere is going to be slower overall than just using the heap when you need more than 22 characters. 22 is quite a lot, especially for keys. ThisReallyLongKey is still only 17.

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I don't use 256 bytes everywhere. I use a mix of 64, 128, and 256 byte strings depending on the specific use case.
In a hot path, having the data inline is much more important than saving a few hundred bytes. Cache efficiency plus eliminating heap allocations has huge performance benefits in a game engine that's running frames as fast as possible.

[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

having the data inline

It's not as simple as that, depending on the architecture. Typically they would fetch 64-byte cache lines so your 128 bytes aren't going to be magically more cached than 128 bytes on the heap.

Avoiding allocations may help but also maybe not. This is definitely in "I don't believe it until I see benchmarks" realm. I would be really really surprised if the allocation cost was remotely bad enough to justify the "sorry your file is too long" errors.

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 1 points 6 days ago

Check out the benchmark I edited in to my original post. These are not user-provided strings in my case.