On Thursday, 13 February 2014 at 17:41:37 UTC, monarch_dodra
wrote:
On Thursday, 13 February 2014 at 14:45:44 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Stephan Schiffels:
It would be actually easy to implement chunks without the
"save" function, by using an internal buffer, which would
however make this algorithm's memory burden linear in the
chunk size. Would that be acceptable?
I think it's acceptable. But perhaps you need to add one more
optional argument for the buffer :-)
Bye,
bearophile
Users andralex:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/1186
And quickfur:
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/1453
Have submitted different algorithms for a similar problem:
Basically, bu being "2-dimensional lazy" (each subrange is
itself a lazy range). However, both come with their own
pitfalls.
Andrei's still requires forward ranges. quickfur's doesn't,
and, arguably, has a simpler design. However, if I remember
correctly, it is also less efficient (it does double work).
Implementing Quickfur's solution in Chunks for input ranges
only could be a good idea.
It *is* extra work, more code, more code to cover (that is
difficult to cover). I'm not sure we have the man power to
support such complexity: I was able to make chunks work with
forward ranges, but I still haven't even fixed Splitter yet! I
think that should take precedence.
Yeah, nevermind, I won't do it. I realised that you had good
reasons to require a ForwardRange. Chunking really needs some
sort of "save" implemented. And what I had in mind to make it
work on File.byLine with a buffer is actually a hack that
effectively adds "save" functionality to the InputRange… so I
agree it's logically not reasonable to do it here.
Thanks anyway.
Stephan
