is QVector faster even for sequential access? On Tue 27 Jan 2015 at 09:42 Mark Gaiser <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Felix morack <[email protected]> wrote: > >> hello, >> >> >> i recently gained a small, but considerable performance boost by >> switching out QList for QVector in some legacy code. This is hindered by >> the fact that Qt itself often returns QList, eg with QMap::values(). >> >> >> Is there a reason for this? Why arent QVectors used? >> >> >> A somewhat related question, why is there no QList::reserve()? I guess i >> see how that function might not make much sense from an algorithmic pov, >> but shouldnt it at least be there as a NoOp to make it easy switching >> between data structures? >> >> >> best regards, >> >> As far as i know this is for historic reasons. QList used to be faster > then QVector (someone, please correct me if i'm wrong) in the old days, but > nowadays (Qt5 era) they prefer QVector over QList. It is as fast or faster > then QList in nearly every situation. I vaguely remember there being one > exception where QList was faster, but i don't know the exception anymore. > > _______________________________________________ > Interest mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest >
_______________________________________________ Interest mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/interest
