On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Oliver Jowett <[email protected]>wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Feng Xiao <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:31 PM, V.B. <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> ... Actually, I just now took a closer look at the readChunk() method. >>> Even that method makes an internal copy, so it looks like readChunk() isn't >>> what we are looking for after all. Hmmm. >> >> It seems to me that readChunk() has done a redundant copy which can be >> eliminated (and should be). >> > > Does ByteString need to worry about hostile InputStreams? The stream could > retain a reference to the bytearray it was given in the read() call. > Hmm, I haven't thought of that. Seems it should be the reason why it does that copy. Given that, there isn't any way to construct a ByteString with just one copy. > > Oliver > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
