On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Dmitriy Igrishin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey OvermindDL1, > > 2010/11/18 Overmind DL1 <[email protected]> >> >> So, sorry for the top-post and footer (dang phone), but I just have to >> say a few things: >> >> dynamic_cast is very heavyweight. > > How do we measure it ? :-)
Standard RTTI lookup, well benchmarked elsewhere. :) On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Dmitriy Igrishin <[email protected]> wrote: >> You are saving *one* pointer, is it really worth it? > > For one pointer - no. But for all pointers of the WEB (Internet) application > (including pointers of the Wt itself) intended to serve for thousands > simultaneous users it can be worth it. If it possible to save a memory why > not do it ? :-) > Anyway, this is a question about CPU overhead (dynamic_cast) or memory > overhead (pointers). It's up to programmer to decide on it (as Wim noted). > >> >> And as for the table store, the mytable->at(0,0) does not return the >> WText as another type, your WText should be a child of what the at(0,0) >> returns, hence get its children first, right? > > Yep. WTable::elementAt() returns WTableCell instance which is a container. Exactly my point, hence all of the casting from at(?,?) to WText, I am not sure how they could have ever worked? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today http://p.sf.net/sfu/msIE9-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ witty-interest mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest
