Threading and Re-Use of buffers Using Call By Reference node (Duct Tape required)

[GregFreeman]

---

@Darin.K wrote:

Based on my experience, unless it is placed on a duct, duct tape is fairly permanent.  My advice is to learn to live with it, and every so often add a new wrap for aesthetic purposes.

---

That's why they say, "If you can't duck it, **** it."

[D*]

In your example does "Always Copy" do the same thing as "Mark as Modified"?

[Zach J]

Hi D*,

It appears that, in this example, if the top input is set to "Mark as Modified," it will perform the same task as the bottom input that includes the "Always Copy" node.  Both cases are creating a new memory instance to store data for the operations performed on the inputs.

[Intaris · Accepted solution]

The third point above caught my attention.

3) This behavior is the same as we use for dynamic dispatch VIs (when using LV classes)

Does this mean that even though the output type is guaranteed to be the same as the input type and we need essentially an unbroken connection between input and output terminals of a DD VI, LV will not always re-use the buffer for the class?  I thought this was a given when making a DD call.  The run-time check seems (to me as a user) to be superfluous when dealing with DD calls.

I've long been a proponent that DD calls are doing SOMETHING int he background which is unneccessarily slowing down their execution.  Could this be part of it?

Shane.