On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Marco Morandini <morand...@aero.polimi.it>wrote:
> There are some occurrences of > > container.size() == 0 > > scattered throughout the code > (and fewer of container.size() != 0) . > Many of them are harmless, i.e. whenever container > is a vector. Some of them, however, > are for maps of sets (e.g. dolfin/adaptivity/**Extrapolation.cpp:149 ), > leading to completely unnecessary O(N) operations (racall that size() is > O(N) for a map or a list). > > While true for a list, it is not a problem for maps or sets: http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/stl/map/size/ http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/stl/set/size/ While a silly implementation of a list will be O(n) most good implementations keep its size around. -- Andy > I'd like to prepare a (mostly mechanical) patch that changes them into > container.empty() . > > Would be acceptable to change all of them (I'd like to go for this route) > or should I change only the places where container is not a vector? > > Thanks, > > Marco > > ______________________________**_________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin > More help : > https://help.launchpad.net/**ListHelp<https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp> >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
