On 2011-02-07 08:24:32 -0500, spir <denis.s...@gmail.com> said:
Does this have anything to do with currently discussed buffered input ranges? If yes, how does such a design, or any alternative, fit their proposed interface?
You can build all of this on top of a buffered input range. The buffered input range is not an alternative for your complex parsing algorithm, it's just the component managing the buffer.
Having the underlying range manage the buffer (as opposed to having your parser algorithm doing it) means that the buffer implementation can vary depending on the type of range. For instance, if you're parsing directly data in memory, the buffered range can use directly this data in memory as the buffer, requiring no allocation and no copy; if you're parsing from a file or a network stream it'll use a more standard buffer.
But how exactly the buffer is implemented does not affect your parsing algorithm in any way. That's the great thing about it, separation of concerns: your algorithm will work independently of the buffer implementation used. All your parser algorithm has to do is say "shiftFront" and "appendToFront" to control what's available in the buffer.
-- Michel Fortin michel.for...@michelf.com http://michelf.com/
