Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Stacking iterators vs. dataflow
From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-03 22:11:01

on Wed Sep 03 2008, "Giovanni Piero Deretta" <> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:48 AM, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> on Wed Sep 03 2008, "Giovanni Piero Deretta" <> 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
>> iterator.
> So, do you think that buffering could be a good approach to help
> reduce the abstraction overhead of stacked iterator adapters?

I guess I haven't caught on to your line of thinking. I certainly don't
see how buffering could be specifically useful when iterator adaptations
are nested.

Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at