6 Apr
2010
6 Apr
'10
5:24 a.m.
On 5 April 2010 20:01, Nevin Liber <nevin@eviloverlord.com> wrote:
On 4 April 2010 11:09, Scott McMurray <me22.ca+boost@gmail.com> wrote:
2) The hash() function is const, and copies the accumulator, then pads and length-appends the copied version, getting the hash from there instead. That gives perhaps the nicest interface, but the extra copying would be somewhat expensive.
I prefer this interface. This is the same as Boost.CRC (and heck, std::string::c_str() for that matter). If you still wish to provide a faster but destructive one, just use another function.
So x.hash() would then be copy(x).end_of_message()? I could go for that.