On 5/8/2014 11:19 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
In case 1, the user has to manually create various intermediate buffers
to store intermediate results. I used a trivial example here, but in
application code, the processing you need is usually far more complex.
This means creating lots of intermediate buffers, making sure you link
the right ones together, etc.. The code becomes very verbose, and
becomes a maintenance nightmare (which of the tmp1, tmp2, tmp3 buffers
refer to which fragment of the result again? Oh oops, I think I passed
the wrong output range to setExtension).
In case 2, the user decides when a buffer is needed and when it's not.
The function calls chain very nicely. The code is more readable, and
easy to maintain (and needless allocations -- including temporary static
buffers -- are eliminated).
I think you nailed it.
Being able to eliminate temporary buffers is a big win. The fastest way to
manage allocated memory is to not need allocated memory.
