[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> I like this variant best. I don't think that writing strings with >> lots of escape sequences to an unbuffered port happens often enough to >> justify implementing a second buffering mechanism. >> >> When outputting an escaped char, we can additionally assemble the >> escape sequence in a fixed size buffer and then output that in one go. > > I think you overlooked my patch. :-)
No, I saw it. :) > It also assumes that outputting escaped characters is pretty rare. > Therefore, it only relies on a fixed-size buffer (whose size is that of > the string plus a few bytes). This buffer gets filled in in _one_ > string traversal if there are no (or not a lot of) escaped characters. Yes, but you still need to check for overflow etc. Your PUSH_TO_BUFFER macro is not really trivial and it used in six places or so. In my view, that's a full buffering mechanism... -- GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405 _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user
