This program reports only one allocation per operation, which seems to indicate that your solution is already the right one:
https://play.golang.org/p/Fx1EMYKRRd On 1 February 2017 at 09:18, T L <tapir....@gmail.com> wrote: > Sometimes, I want to create a new string which will not share the underlying > bytes with other strings. > For example, to avoid the substring memory leak problem. > > newStr := string([]byte(oldStr)) is simple but will make two memory > allocations, and one of them is a waste. > > There are two solutions which only make one memory allocation in > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/naMCI9Jt6Qg > (code: https://play.golang.org/p/3rVsMTaHUz). > But in that thread, someone said the two are not safe from being optimized > unexpectedly in later compiler versions. > > I found the most approached function in the standard lib is > strings.Repeat(), but it also makes two memory allocations. > > Is there a safe way to do this with only one memory allocation? > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "golang-nuts" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
