In-place extension of arrays only for certain alignment?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On 8/18/22 1:16 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> On 8/17/22 19:27, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>  > On 8/17/22 10:09 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>  >>  > IIRC, your data does not need to be sequential in *physical memory*,
>  >>  > which means you can use a ring buffer that is segmented instead of
>  >>  > virtually mapped, and that can be of any size.
>  >>
>  >> I thought about that as well. But I would like the sizes of blocks
>  >> (Appenders?) be equal in size so that opIndex still can provide O(1)
>  >> guarantee. (Compute the block + an offset.)
>  >
>  > It's still O(1). You only have 2 slices to worry about.
> 
> Sometimes 2... I wanted to leave the sliding window width dynamic.
> 
> So, there will be M buffers, not 2. If their lengths are not equal, 
> opIndex must be O(M). M is expected to be small but still...

Once you need more size, you can reallocate (it should stabilize). A 
ring buffer of N values where N doesn't change should only require one 
buffer, 2 slices of that buffer.

-Steve