Array append performance

[Bill Baxter]

On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 2:16 AM, Steven Schveighoffer
<schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
> "dsimcha" wrote

> I see nothing wrong with having a library solution to this.  D and
> especially D2 is to the point where syntax of custom structs is really easy
> to use.
>
> The problem is that many times I don't append to an array or slice, why
> should I have to accept the cost of an extra 4-8 byte field for every slice
> and array that isn't going to change size (which I would argue is used more
> often)?

Personally I'd argue that appending efficiently is important to more
programs than than saving 4-8 bytes here and there.  So that would
suggest that lean-and-mean fixed-sized arrays should be the library
solution, and arrays with a capacity field should be the built-in
type.

--bb