Re: Buffer/String split, take2

On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Tsantilas Christos
<chtsanti_at_users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I believe that the D&C design is better than Universal Buffer because of
> many reasons. My sense is that the Universal Buffer will be very complex and
> will not have the desired results, because the real problems exist in other
> subsystems (eg parsers).
>
> But if choosing the D&C design means that we are going to wait for 2 or more
> years to be implemented because of the lack of the development time maybe
> it is better to accept the Universal Buffer design. It will not solve all
> the problems but it is not bad, it is an improvement.
>
> But again I like the idea of a well designed Buffers Api, where buffer
> classes handle different cases and String be a class (or classes) which
> operates on Buffer (sub-)regions.

The need to avoid data copying and the numerous xstrndup()s we have
laying around is in any case the key win to this.
The discussion on the topic went ahead on IRC yesterday. I've updated
the wiki to include it, please see
http://wiki.squid-cache.org/MeetUps/IrcMeetup-2009-01-17.

-- 
    /kinkie