Disadvantages of ARC

[Dmitry Olshansky]

06-Feb-2014 22:29, Andrei Alexandrescu пишет:
> On 2/6/14, 10:15 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> That's only because the current output range API consists of only a
>> single .put method. Please see the other thread started by Adam Ruppe:
>> we should spend some time to think about how we can streamline output
>> ranges so that they can be used just as easily as input ranges --
>> y'know, with UFCS chaining and such, that doesn't require a ton of
>> boilerplate like the current process of: declare output range, pass to
>> function, get data from result, pass to next function, etc.. This is
>> primarily a syntactical problem, not a logical one, and since we're so
>> good at syntactic bikeshedding, we should be able to solve this
>> relatively easily, right? ;-)
>
> I don't think it's that easy. For example the output range must be
> passed as a ref parameter into the function, which is already
> introducing friction.
>
> FWIW things we can add are to output ranges:
>
> ~= for convenience
> .flush() or .done() to mark the end of several writes
> .clear() to clear the range (useful if e.g. it's implemented as a slice
> with appending)
>

.reserve(n) to notify underlying sink that it n items are coming (it 
should preallocate etc.)


-- 
Dmitry Olshansky