Re: [Gnash-commit] gnash ChangeLog libamf/element.cpp libnet/cque....

[strk]

On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 01:54:11PM -0600, Rob Savoye wrote:

>   It didn't work "as was" for me. You can attempt to apply it to this
> current version of ::merge(), I'm done staring at it.

Ok, I'll put it in.

> To be honest this
> whole thing about singular iterators is too obscure.

Iterators can be invalidated by operations on the container, so you
should be sure that the container is not modified while you scan it,
unless the modifying method will take care of giving you back a
new iterator that will work fine.

> > It wasn't deleting elements as I wasn't sure about ownership, but would be
> > pretty easy to modify to remove the merged lines.
> 
>   Basically, here's the idea of merging buffers. A large packet will be
> several Buffers, as the network will only read a set amount of data. The
> final packet in a series is always less than the default size.

Is the "less-than" ensured somehow or just an empirical assumption ?
I mean... what if the whole packet size happens to be a multiple of
NETBUFSIZE ?

>   Some protocols, like RTMP, need the entire data as one packet, so I
> added the ::merge method to do this.

I guess order of buffers should be retained right ? 

        Before merge:
        A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 B4 C1 C2 

        After merge starting at B:
        A1 A2 A3 A4 B C1 C2

This would be nice adding a check for in the existing test.

--strk;