From: "Steve" <nospam_steved94@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Buffers or POs?
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 20:53:19 -0700
Date: 2005-10-22T20:53:19-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <kI-dna7Sj6liH8beRVn-pg@comcast.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 1129573392.886254.115610@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
"Tom" <almut.maurer@planet-interkom.de> wrote in message
news:1129573392.886254.115610@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I have the problem that the OS provides services for buffers which are
> similar to Protected Objects. What is better to use in terms of
> performance the provided OS services or a self-implemented buffer
> utilising Protected Objects.
>
There is no absolute way to answer this question.
Ideally a compiler targeting such an OS will map protected objects to the
most efficient implementation on that system. So... if the OS services are
most efficient, the compiler will make use of them.
In practice compilers tend to use techniques that permit re-use across
platforms, so the efficiency on each individual target OS/archtecture may
not be optimal.
The only real way to know is to run tests.
Steve
(The Duck)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-23 3:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-17 18:23 Buffers or POs? Tom
2005-10-17 19:32 ` Jeffrey R. Carter
2005-10-23 3:53 ` Steve [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox