I want to know which of the following implementation is better in
terms of performance and usability. Option A is much easier and
portable across different protobuf versions. Is it worth the trouble
trying to go with Option B? In my tests, I could not find much of a
performance gain by using
Option B avoids an extra copy of the data. It should work with all versions
of protocol buffers. Use it if profiling shows a lot of time spent in this
code, otherwise use whichever version you find easier to follow.
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 8:51 AM, nirajshr niraj...@gmail.com wrote:
I want to
BTW
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 8:51 AM, nirajshr niraj...@gmail.com wrote:
repeated DoubleData bucketDouble = 2;
You should declare this field packed:
repeated DoubleData bucketDouble = 2 [packed=true];
This will improve efficiency on the wire.
--
You received this message because you
How about this way-more-readable variant of option B:
add_double_vector(deal_pb.bucket(i).bucketdouble().data(),
deal_pb.bucket(i).bucketdouble().size());
This assumes that add_bouble_vector only needs a const pointer. If it needs
a non-const pointer, add the
