Permalink
Reply
On 8/18/22 1:16 AM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>On 8/17/22 19:27, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>On 8/17/22 10:09 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> > IIRC, your data does not need to be sequential in physical memory,
> which means you can use a ring buffer that is segmented instead of
> virtually mapped, and that can be of any size.
I thought about that as well. But I would like the sizes of blocks
(Appenders?) be equal in size so that opIndex still can provide O(1)
guarantee. (Compute the block + an offset.)
It's still O(1). You only have 2 slices to worry about.
Sometimes 2... I wanted to leave the sliding window width dynamic.
So, there will be M buffers, not 2. If their lengths are not equal, opIndex must be O(M). M is expected to be small but still...
Once you need more size, you can reallocate (it should stabilize). A ring buffer of N values where N doesn't change should only require one buffer, 2 slices of that buffer.
-Steve