On 12/7/13 5:13 AM, Michel Fortin wrote:
On 2013-12-05 16:46:52 +0000, Andrei Alexandrescu
<[email protected]> said:
On 12/5/13 8:19 AM, monarch_dodra wrote:
Output range! :)
Output range interface makes no linearity requirements. Just that:
"out.put(this)" compiles.
Hrm, construction of a hash table is linearizable so bad example on my
part. But I'm talking about general structured data such as objects
with allocated fields and connections to other objects etc. etc.
You have to admit that a "bump the pointer" allocator is pretty much the
same thing as an output range that fills a preexisting array.
Only of the output range is untyped. An allocator traffics in untyped
chunks; an output range usually has an element type.
So here's an interesting idea: perhaps typed allocators should *be*
output ranges. The difference is that if you "put" something on the
allocator, it copies/moves it to the allocator's heap and returns you a
pointer. While if you "put" something on a generic output range, don't
expect any pointer out of it.
Some functions, like buildPath, would only require an output range.
Others will need a more complete allocator, that's those functions that
want to refer back to elements they've "put" on the allocator's heap.
I don't think that would work.
Andrei
