On 31 Aug 2008, at 21:57, Tim Moore wrote:

> I guess you're not using map::lower_bound because you want to  
> support an
> arbitrary ordering different from the map? What will the lower bound  
> result mean
> in that case?

Actually my logic is busted anyway, I was hoping to avoid a linear  
search of the data in the case where there's a custom ordering, but  
it's harder than I allowed for. So the current logic is not right  
anyway, and I have a fix pending for that. Of course it only affects  
the KLN89b in any case, and I have the feeling that my  
'FGIdentOrdering' solution is too general. In the longer run, I have  
two potential fixes:

  - allow a device with custom ordering to create a private ordering  
table (effectively a second index, i.e another map) - this only works  
if all the 'things' in the map are pointer-based instead of struct- 
based, which is one of the things I'm doing in my FGPositioned hacking

OR

  - just make all idents in all FG ordered the KLN89b way, since other  
docs I've seen have hinted that this ordering is standard in the  
aviation world. If someone ever needs some truly byzantine ordering,  
I'd need to rethink that approach, but it's the simplest and most  
efficient, so seems quite suitable unless anyone can present a  
compelling reason against it.

James

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to