Skip to content

Test whether supporting passing an optional mutable buffer to Storage::read_slice has drawbacks (it does)#488

Closed
ia0 wants to merge 2 commits intogoogle:developfrom
ia0:read_cow_mut
Closed

Test whether supporting passing an optional mutable buffer to Storage::read_slice has drawbacks (it does)#488
ia0 wants to merge 2 commits intogoogle:developfrom
ia0:read_cow_mut

Conversation

@ia0
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@ia0 ia0 commented Jun 3, 2022

Adds optional buffer on top of Cow trick.

@coveralls
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coveralls commented Jun 3, 2022

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.3%) to 90.287% when pulling c26a8fa on ia0:read_cow_mut into 85fe9cd on google:develop.

@ia0 ia0 closed this Jun 3, 2022
@ia0 ia0 deleted the read_cow_mut branch June 3, 2022 14:59
@ia0
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

ia0 commented Jun 3, 2022

We don't need this. It's the same binary size but it's slower. So closing the PR.

@ia0 ia0 changed the title Test Test whether supporting passing an optional mutable buffer to Storage::read_slice has drawbacks (it does) Jun 3, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants