On 02/05/2011 08:45 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
One thing I'm wondering is whether it'd be more efficient if we could provide our own buffer to be filled. In cases where you want to preserve the data, this could let you avoid double-copying: first copy in the temporary buffer and then at the permanent storage location. If you need the data only temporarily however providing your buffer to be filled might be less efficient for a range that can't avoid copying to the temporary buffer for some reason..
Does this also makes sense when one needs to iterate over a whole set of source data via buferred input rangeS? I mean the same buffer can be reused, avoiding repeted allocation (or is this wrong or irrelevant?).
Deins -- _________________ vita es estrany spir.wikidot.com
