Paul Herring wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Christopher Coale 
> <[email protected] <mailto:chris95219%40gmail.com>> wrote:
> > its going to be a lot faster to work
> > with pointers than to copy around data for every little thing you do.
>
> Or there's references.
>
> Or there's the fact that it /may/ make little difference to the speed
> of the code if it's dealing with pointers to objects, references to
> objects or the objects themselves.
>
> If you're dealing with creating/deleting objects in the innermost loop
> that's running for 99% of the time when your application is running
> for days, it will make a substantial difference.
>
> If, on the other hand, it's maybe a one off occurrence, or something
> that might happen 0.1% of the time in your code (when most of the
> other 99.9% is waiting for user input or disk I/O) then it really
> doesn't matter.
>
> Which goes back to my first question -
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Paul Herring <[email protected] 
> <mailto:pauljherring%40gmail.com>> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Jos Timanta Tarigan
> > <[email protected] <mailto:jos_t_tarigan%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
> >> is there any point of creating a vector of pointer for efficiency 
> stuuff?
> >
> > Do you have an efficiency problem?
>
> Guestimating where bottlenecks exist is not a productive use of any
> programmer's time - that's why profilers exist.
>
> And that's exactly what the rest of you are doing - guestimating. None
> of you have any idea what the OP's program does, nor where it spends
> most of its time - and I suspect the OP doesn't either; hence my
> question.
>
> -- 
> PJH
>
> http://shabbleland.myminicity.com/ind 
> <http://shabbleland.myminicity.com/ind>
> http://www.chavgangs.com/register.php?referer=9375 
> <http://www.chavgangs.com/register.php?referer=9375>
>
> 
I come from a background of game development, so speed is always an 
issue for me. I tend to pick out the littlest of things, and make a big 
deal about them (such as using division when multiplication could be 
used, passing by-pointer instead of by-value, etc.) Storing a list of 
references is not a good idea because they will unintentionally lose 
their scope unless you have a reference to a global variable, which 
isn't usually the case. God gave us pointers (and C++ gave us "new" and 
"delete") for a reason - let's use them. :)

On top of that, the stack really shouldn't be used for general storage 
anyways - that's what the heap is for.

Reply via email to