Joe Buck wrote:

> As a general rule there is a performance cost for making iterators
> on a data structure safe with respect to modifications of that data
> structure.  I'm not in a position to say what the right solution is
> in this case, but passes that iterate over bitmaps without modifying
> those bitmaps shouldn't be penalized.  One solution sometimes used is
> two sets of iterators, with a slower version that's safe under
> modification.

  But then we'll run into the same bug again when someone uses the wrong kind,
or changes the usage of a bitmap without changing which type it is.  I think
making them all safe, but under --enable-checking only, with the safety code
compiled out when it's disabled might be a nice solution.

    cheers,
      DaveK

Reply via email to