• deltapi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    No, you can’t have a group of zero, so the counter doesn’t need to waste a position counting zero.

    • HereIAm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      If you ever create a system where the number of users is “group.members - 1” everywhere in the code, I’d be very disappointed in you and deny that PR.

      On another note; I doubt WhatsApp are so concerned with performance they are actually limiting the number of group members by the data type.

      • BillBurBaggins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        But it wouldn’t be like that though would it. It would be public group.members() and the u8 would be private.

        If all the millions of groups are saved on a central database then making the size a u8 isn’t really that weird

        • HereIAm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          I hadn’t thought about it on their server side tbf. But the more i think about it maybe there are other compounding reasons to keep group sizes small, such as the exponential number of links in a growing network and such. But, that is all beyond my knowledge area.

    • seejur@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      You cannot also have a group of 1, therefore either is 255 or 257. 256 is oddly specific (or the code was made by an intern)