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" <gpderetta-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> 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 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
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk