On 2024-03-13 05:25, Francesco Chemolli wrote:
I spent some time wondering whether we could reduce
code duplication by making SBuf implement the Packable interface,
and replacing SBufStream with PackableStream.
This idea was studied two years ago, including spending many hours on
discussing virtualization costs and building specific examples to
illustrate those costs. You have participated.
https://github.com/squid-cache/squid/pull/932
I also suspect that "code duplication" you are wondering about either
does not exist or is not related to the suggested changes: SBufStream
code does not duplicate much, and moving its functionality to SBuf will
_move_ unique code, not REmove it.
If you want to continue in this overall direction, I suggest identifying
a specific use case (the simplest one you can find) that illustrates
code duplication that should not be resolved by other means.
HTH,
Alex.
The interface changes seem rather minimal, SBuf already implements
append(const char*, int) and vappendf; the main difference there is
that SBuf returns *this.
These methods are of course virtual, which is a price to pay, but besides
the vtbl size, maybe there is a way to not pay their cost when not used
What do you think?
--
Francesco
_______________________________________________
squid-dev mailing list
squid-dev@lists.squid-cache.org
https://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-dev
_______________________________________________
squid-dev mailing list
squid-dev@lists.squid-cache.org
https://lists.squid-cache.org/listinfo/squid-dev
