Jon Allured

Computer Programmer, Whiskey Drinker, Comic Book Reader

Kellum on Pixels; Shaughnessy on Shared Strings

published Monday, January 23, 2012

Scott Kellum explores how devices where a pixel is not always a pixel are making the lives of designers even harder than they already were. He starts out by establishing some vocabulary:

The truth is that there are two different definitions of pixels: they can be the smallest unit a screen can support (a hardware pixel) or a pixel can be based on an optically consistent unit called a “reference pixel.”

[A hardware pixel is] the smallest point a screen can physically display and is usually comprised of red, green, and blue sub-pixels...it cannot be stretched, skewed, or subdivided.

The w3c currently defines the reference pixel as the standard for all pixel-based measurements. This new pixel should look exactly the same in all viewing situations.

Hardware pixels were clear to me, but I had a harder time understanding reference pixels until I took a look at Figure 1. A hardware pixel is the actual pixel bounded by the physical pixel square on the device while a reference pixel is used by the hardware pixels to draw things.

Next he talks about how you can use the device-pixel-ratio media query to identify devices with scaled pixels. He is able to use some media query magic to normalize two devices with the same number of hardware pixels, but different scaled pixels. Pretty neat and also, I'm glad I don't have to deal with this stuff.


Pat Shaughnessy discusses how the Ruby interpreter uses an optimization called "copy on write" by diving deep into its code.

He starts off by outlining an example he used in another post he did on Ruby and Strings and shows us using a debug script that Ruby will try not to duplicate a string if it doesn't need to. He is able to get down to the hexadecimal values and show the relationship between two Ruby variables that point to the same RString structure that itself points to one Heap String.

Then he shows how Object#dup will make two RString structures that are pointing to one Heap String. This is what a "Shared String" really is, so if you have this:

str = "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit"
str2 = String.dup(str)

Then str and str2 both point to different RString structures and those in turn point to the same Heap String. But the RString structure that str2 points to is actually different from the RString str points to. The former has a pointer to the latter. So far, so good.

Next he goes into what happens when you start modifying that duplicate string. Turns out when you modify str2 the first thing that happens is that Ruby creates a copy of the heap data and removes the pointer connecting the two RString structures. Once that's done, then it performs the modification. This is true for a modification like upcase, but it also applies to slice - it will create new heap data for the substring.

But this isn't always true: if your slice is less than 24 characters long then you'll get an Embedded String. Also, if your substring is longer than 24 characters, but includes all of the remaining characters, then Ruby does something else cool. Say you do this:

str = "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit"
str2 = str[1..-1]

Then str2 will point to a different RString structure, but that structure will point to the same heap data, its just that its ptr value will be advanced one position.

He concludes by reminding us that in most cases, Ruby developers shouldn't worry too much about these details, that the interpreter is there to do this stuff for us. Its interesting to know what's going on behind the scenes and in certain edge cases, this knowledge could help you write faster programs, but mostly this feels like an academic exercise and its one that I really enjoyed.