On Thu, 20 Mar 2025 at 21:27, James K. Lowden <jklow...@schemamania.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 20:33:36 +0000 > Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > There's no need to keep using std::find_if from the beginning of the > > container after every removal, just update the iterator after erasing > > an element. > > > > This is how C++20 std::erase_if is implemented.\ > > LGTM. I am gun-shy about using iterators while modifying containers. > I know there are rules. :-/
Yes, the erased iterator is invalidated, but it returns an iterator to the next element after the erased one, so we can continue iterating from there instead of using the no-invalid one. That's what the p=erase(p) patter does. The important thing is to _not_ increment in that case, because erasing *p and then pointing to the next element replaces the increment. > Likely you'll find other examples. The arrays are small and the > performance impact is too, but neatness counts and simpler is better. > > Jonathan, if your patches to the FE so far are awaiting *my* approval, > consider it done. I've read them and they're straightforward. If I > need to do more than just say that, please direct me. OK, thanks. On that topic, should you be listed in the MAINTAINERS file? I see Bob in there, but don't see your name. I won't make the changes to use 'auto' which Bob didn't like. I'll send another patch with a more minimal change for the remove_if call using isspace.
