> the only good idea for double buffering is in graphics programming Hee hee... I was wondering how long it would take for someone to say that! :-)
> -----Original Message----- > From: Neil Steinbuch (Mobile Active) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 11:08 AM > To: Research Triangle Java User's Group mailing list. > Subject: Re: [Juglist] buffers on buffers? > > > PS: the only good idea for double buffering is in graphics programming > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Richard O. Hammer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Java Users Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 4:41 PM > Subject: [Juglist] buffers on buffers? > > > > Is double buffering ever a good idea? > > > > Here are two lines of code from a class of mine: > > InputStream in = new BufferedInputStream( socket.getInputStream(), > > 1024 ); BufferedReader smtpCommandLineReader = new > BufferedReader(new > > InputStreamReader(in)); > > > > Is it good, or is it stupid, to build a BufferedReader with a > > BufferedInputStream? Why? Are there underlying tradeoffs? > > > > Thanks, > > Rich Hammer > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Juglist mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Juglist mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_tri> jug.org > _______________________________________________ Juglist mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://trijug.org/mailman/listinfo/juglist_trijug.org
