From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,8ab6ed0f71c479cd
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!news.k-dsl.de!aioe.org!not-for-mail
From: tmoran@acm.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: API design problem - buffer scatter I/O
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:16:26 +0100 (CET)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <ggenha$ute$1@aioe.org>
References: 
 <f980d11e-4113-41a8-9c24-bf2df53e18f8@a12g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: AxZNCoKKMuaRAaNPzqFEIQ.user.aioe.org
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 17:16:26 +0000 (UTC)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.7.5
X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:3743
Date: 2008-11-24T18:16:26+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> The problem is that this is a single, continuous array.
> How would you approach the design of API for multi-buffer I/O? Multi-
> buffer means that the user can provide many arrays, probably of
> different sizes, and the library will fill them from first to last.
  Is this an actual problem?  In most systems copying the bytes from
an IO buffer into different places will be a small percentage of the
time taken by the actual IO, so the simplicity of a single IO buffer
is worth the modest cost.