mwolff added a comment.
I'm not into the code base, just adding some comments to ensure everything is
taken into account - maybe your initial attempt was better after all...
INLINE COMMENTS
> kcoredirlister.cpp:852
> + if (refresh) {
> + (*it).refresh();
> }
is it OK that you operate on a copy of the item here? the item in the hash
won't be modified, is that on purpose?
> kcoredirlister.cpp:1970
> // Delete all remaining items
> - QMutableListIterator<KFileItem> it(lstItems);
> + QMutableHashIterator<QUrl, KFileItem> it(hashItems);
> while (it.hasNext()) {
O(N) iteration over a large hash is extremely slow, is this done elsewhere? if
so, then you may need to find an alternative approach - potentially via
multiple containers or by using a sorted vector after all like you proposed
initially
> kcoredirlister.cpp:2532
> // Of course if there is no filter and we can do a range-insertion
> instead of a loop, that might be good.
> - QList<KFileItem>::const_iterator kit = items.begin();
> - const QList<KFileItem>::const_iterator kend = items.end();
> + auto kit = items.begin();
> + const auto kend = items.end();
this can be slow, see above
REPOSITORY
R241 KIO
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D11282
To: jtamate, #frameworks, dfaure
Cc: mwolff, michaelh, ngraham
