|
Jim Langston wrote: > I could think of a few uses. > > 1. I have a buffer I am using that, currently, is 1000 bytes. > I've used up > 500 bytes so far. I want to add an element that's 600 bytes. Rather than > add 100 bytes to the end, re-allocate 600 bytes from byte 501. What's the difference? Don't you get bytes 501 to 1100 either way? > 2. I have a buffer of records that are 100 bytes each, and I have > 10 so far, > for 1000 bytes. I want to add a record into the middle. Rather than add > the 100 bytes at the end and shift the records from 5 to 10 to the next > record, just add 100 bytes in the middle. > 3. I want to delete a record in the middle as the above scenario. Wouldn't user indexes be faster for this type of application?
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
