On Mar 8, 2007, at 16:27 , David Roundy wrote:
The real issue for me is that DiffArrays only make any sense at all if you often update a subset of your array, which I never expect to do... so even if they were efficiently implemented to the point of zero overhead, they would gain me nothing, and that's almost certainly overly optimistic.
But that's not my understanding of what's *supposed* to be happening: the point of DiffArrays is is not optimizing partial updates, it's optimizing the head at the expense of any (by intent few or none) references that might be held elsewhere. As such, if there are no such references the DiffArray *should* get you cheap in- place (destructive) updates. It's possible that the current *implementation* is flawed in the way you describe; if so, that should probably be brought up on the libraries list, because the documentation and the intent seem to be saying otherwise. -- brandon s. allbery [linux,solaris,freebsd,perl] allbery@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH