On 2010-06-15 09:06, Bartosz wrote:
By the way.
After replace svArrays by STL containers, in some cases I observed boost of
performance.
For example:
for (USHORT i = 0; i< aEntries.size(); ++i)
{
if (aEntries.at(i).aFntFmt == rFntFmt)
{
aRes = aEntries[i].aId;
break;
}
}
is much faster than:
USHORT nCnt = aEntries.Count();
USHORT i;
for (i = 0; i< nCnt&& 0 == aRes.Len(); ++i)
{
if (aEntries[i].aFntFmt == rFntFmt)
aRes = aEntries[i].aId;
}
If you're about to optimize then try the iterator-version of above as
well. Something like (not tested, off the top of my head, and I don't
know the actual type of aEntries):
EntryType::iterator end = aEntries.end();
for (EntryType::iterator i = aEntries.begin(); i != end; i++)
{
if (i->aFntFmt == rFntFmt)
{
aRes = i->aId;
break;
}
}
In some of the code that I work on (not OOo, but another C++ project) I
have seen a very nice performance boost by switching from array-style
subscripting to iterators.
Cheers
-- Jan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.org
