On 2018/07/10 17:49:33, dak wrote:
On 2018/07/10 17:10:53, benko.pal wrote: > LGTM; just by looking I can't see how it can make make fail. > using rp[-2] and rp[-1] instead of lastcol and c would be cleaner to
me, but
> YMMV.
Since the whole point is to do the operation in-place, rp[-2] may
already have
been overwritten by rp[-1] in the last iteration. It may seem cleaner
to you to
use rp[-2] but it would be a rather ugly bug. Doing things in-place
is more
efficient but you have to keep track of what you are doing.
I consider it possible that mixing a const iterator with a non-const
one might
be what caused the compilation error but I'd want to see the error
message to be
sure.
Just seen <https://stackoverflow.com/a/12662703> which indicates that as of C++11, you can use a const_iterator for a call to erase (since the modifiability is ensured by the object erase is called on and the const-ness of the iterator is irrelevant) but apparently not previously. So I guess it is my newer compiler that made the erase call work without complaint. I'll see how I can make this C++08(?)-save. https://codereview.appspot.com/351720043/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
