U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Re: Core chat... [message #12334 is a reply to message #12332]

Thu, 25 October 2007 15:19

mdelfede
Messages: 1308
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

luzr wrote on Thu, 25 October 2007 14:34

Well, sometimes finding bugs IS tedious. But this one was the first At related I had to spend more than 10 minutes.

That's because you're a guru of your UPP code, in my case that would have taken days, I guess.... I haven't seen it even when you pointed at the source....

Quote:

Hey, think about it a little bit more. To make what you suggest work, CheckSize has to return a reference to contained element. So it behaves exactly the same as At.

yes, of course, but in my way you can't do very few bad thins with that reference.... you could even write

a.CheckSize(100)[100] = 5;

whith no danger. Of course, you could even force it do do bad things such

a.CheckSize(100)[100] = a[10];

but then, you're forcing things to be buggy Very Happy

BTW, I still think that a CheckSize() function should return nothing, to avoid such caveats..... I'd rather

a.CheckSize(100);
a[100] = 5;

Quote:

Actually, would be a bit slower, as you get the variable address evaluated in the At once. Your version evaluates it twice (and in composition example, access the outer container twice too).

well, that depends of compiler code... usually "modern" compilers take care of avoiding double access when unneeded.

BTW, all that chat becomes question of personal taste... like commenting code. I usually prefere to write some more lines and have less "hidden" bugs possibilities.... as I usually comment about each code line in order to be able to know what I did even 1 year later. Other people like more to write a single-1000-chars line of code with no comment at all, and they can understand it even after 10 years.

I'd find more interesting a chat about reference counted objects.... I think I'll get back my old (and poorly written) array class, just to see the performance differences Smile

It was done mainly to manage DispInterfaces arrays in a COM app managing Autocad, so no great speed requirements, but I guess it could be polished to be of some interest.

Just a last word, I *don't* think to propose you to change from pick_ to refcounted arrays (usually I hate when someone writes to me of changing core parts of my code !), I'm just curious of performance differences and possible caveats of this kind of solution.

Ciao

Max

Report message to a moderator