Erik Jaesler <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Just a thought; feel free to rip it to shreds. ;) The reason I > included > a re-use stack was to avoid the performance hit of having to search > the > map for an unused token. How about this compromise solution: > continue > to place "returned" tokens on the stack, but don't use them until the > token counter maxes out. Also, use a queue instead of a stack to add > a > bit more separation between the return and re-issue of a given token. > I > will look at using a hash map instead of a regular map. There is just one little problem with that method (depends on the implementation, though :-)): when the token counter overflows, there are about 4 billion entries on the stack... hm... that doesn't sound very nice, does it=3F :-) Adios... Axel.