On Friday 09 August 2002 11:30 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | On Friday 09 August 2002 10:37 am, Angus Leeming wrote:
> >> Incidentally, why not:
> >>
> >> void Counters::reset(string const & match)
> >> {
> >> CounterList::iterator it = counterList.begin();
> >> CounterList::iterator end = counterList.end();
> >> if (match.empty()) {
> >> for (; it != end; ++it) {
> >> it->second.reset();
> >> }
> >> } else {
> >> for (; it != end; ++it) {
> >> if (it->first.find(match) != string::npos)
> >> it->second.reset();
> >> }
> >> }
> >> }
> |
> | Actually, shouldn't that be:
> |
> | void Counters::reset(string const & match)
> | {
> | if (match.empty()) {
> | CounterList::iterator it = counterList.begin();
> | CounterList::iterator end = counterList.end();
> | for (; it != end; ++it) {
> | it->second.reset();
> | }
> | } else {
> | CounterList::iterator it = counterList.find(match);
>
> Only if:
> - exact match is wanted.
> - only one element in counterList can match.
Ok. So then my first suggestion is an improvemnt on the current code and
doesn't change the semantics. Perhaps a comment would be helpful
} else {
// reset all counters whose index contains match as a
// sub-string
for (; it != end; ++it) {
if (it->first.find(match) != string::npos)
it->second.reset();
}
}
Angus
