Subject: Re: [boost] Stacking iterators vs. dataflow
From: Giovanni Piero Deretta (gpderetta_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-03 21:10:54
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:48 AM, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> on Wed Sep 03 2008, "Giovanni Piero Deretta" <gpderetta-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>> Given an appropriate buffering size (a memory page?) you could hide
>> the buffering step inside an interator adaptor, which, instead of
>> producing every N'th value on the fly, would batch the production of
>> enough elements to fill the buffer.
>> David: BTW, I think that you can use exactly the same abstraction used
>> for segmented iterators to expose the buffering capability of a
>> buffered iterator adaptor.
> Yes, an iterator with a backing buffer would work great as a segmented
So, do you think that buffering could be a good approach to help
reduce the abstraction overhead of stacked iterator adapters?
I think you have to give up a bit of lazyness (from the pull side it
is harder to determine exactly how much of the input sequence you want
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk