Hi,
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 10:50:10AM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> Maybe we should have used boost::ptr_deque instead. You get heap
> allocation cleanup for free.
Or a deque of smart pointers. Without range-based for, that was annoying to
use because you needed the double dereference
for(std::deque<std::auto_ptr<OBJECT> >::const_iterator i = objects.begin;
i != object.end(); ++i)
(*i)->function();
which was the main reason boost::ptr_container exists. Today, we can just
for(auto const &p : objects)
p->function();
which is not perfect, but probably good enough.
I'm not entirely convinced we need lists of polymorphic objects that much.
The construct where VIA is a subclass of TRACK (which is also used
directly) could possibly be changed into abstract TRACK as a base, TRACE
and VIA as (final) most derived classes, and objects stored in deque<TRACE>
and deque<VIA> without fear of slicing. That should cut down on the number
of allocations required, and also allow introducing a pool allocator into
the deque type as a further optimization.
Simon
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
