On 05/13/2011 03:24 AM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > On 05/12/2011 11:36 PM, Richard Heck wrote: >> Before I commit these---especially to branch---I thought I'd post them >> for comment. >> >> The 0002 patch shows the real point of this: We do not need to clone the >> whole Buffer here, but only need access to a copy of the BufferParams. >> >> The 0001 patch does what's necessary to make that happen, and then a bit >> more: Various bits of code that were in Buffer but actually only need >> access to the BufferParams need to be moved into BufferParams. >> >> This is all preparatory to fixing some problems with Buffer::clone(). >> >> Comments welcome, if only, "Seems OK". > > 0001 is the right thing to do. > I'm not sure about this, but the following does seem like it follows from some good principle: If code can go into BufferParams instead of Buffer, it should.
> 0002 seems correct. > OK, thanks. Richard
