You mean 'twice as fast'? I must say I find it hard to believe this would ever be faster. In both cases one has to read the source object, allocate storage for a new object, and copy. The serialization method does strictly more work, by allocating a byte array, serializing/deserializing, and copying in between. I agree, copies should be avoided if possible anyway. but it's my strong guess that we don't want to implement any clone() methods this way -- it's pretty simple to write clone() anyhow. As always, open to being proven wrong by data...
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Ted Dunning<[email protected]> wrote: > For small vectors, I would believe that. For large vectors, I would not be > surprised to see the round-trip to be up to half as fast. > > The fact is, however, that you want to avoid copying for large vectors and > matrices.
