On 14.06.2010 23:32, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
On 06/14/2010 07:05 AM, Bartosz wrote:
I thought I had a patch somewhere to do some of the conversion, but I
can't find it now. I remember that I didn't go ahead with it at the time
because my first cut at it left OOo larger than it was before
On 06/17/10 15:46, Bartosz wrote:
2010/6/16 Eike Rathke wrote:
Hi Bartosz,
On Tuesday, 2010-06-15 09:06:19 +0200, Bartosz wrote:
After replace svArrays by STL containers, in some cases I observed boost of
performance.
For example:
for (USHORT i = 0; i < aEntries.size(); ++i)
Please
2010/6/16 Eike Rathke wrote:
> Hi Bartosz,
>
> On Tuesday, 2010-06-15 09:06:19 +0200, Bartosz wrote:
>
>> After replace svArrays by STL containers, in some cases I observed boost of
>> performance.
>>
>> For example:
>> for (USHORT i = 0; i < aEntries.size(); ++i)
>
> Please ensure to adapt
Great success!
I have successfully removed the SvArray of objects macro (SV_DECL_OBJARR and
SV_IMPL_OBJARR macros).
Please feel free to check and test it.
Patch is available at (replace_svarray3.patch):
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=112395
2010/6/15 Bjoern Michaelsen:
>> Cha
Hi Bartosz,
On Tuesday, 2010-06-15 09:06:19 +0200, Bartosz wrote:
> After replace svArrays by STL containers, in some cases I observed boost of
> performance.
>
> For example:
> for (USHORT i = 0; i < aEntries.size(); ++i)
Please ensure to adapt also all types where necessary, in this c
On 06/15/2010 02:55 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
On 14.06.2010 12:01, Caolán McNamara wrote:
A code replacement like this creates the question what shall be the goal:
- reduce memory footprint
- improve performance
- remove code duplication
- improve code quality
My primary interest is in code
On 2010-06-15 10:44, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
Am Tue, 15 Jun 2010 09:18:45 +0200
schrieb Jan Holst Jensen:
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;
On 14.06.2010 12:01, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 11:22 +0200, Michael Stahl wrote:
the SvArrays should be replaced by appropriate STL types (mostly vector, i
guess, but probably in some cases stacks or deques or something else).
deques I think was the best option in general th
Am Tue, 15 Jun 2010 09:18:45 +0200
schrieb Jan Holst Jensen :
> 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)
> >
On 06/15/10 09:06, Bartosz wrote:
Getting rid of SvArray might not be enough alone to fix this, but it
would be a big step in the right direction. Please also have a look at
the work in cws new_itemsets which tries to get rid of the old
SfxItemSet implementation and replace it with stl container-
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 = aEnt
> Getting rid of SvArray might not be enough alone to fix this, but it
> would be a big step in the right direction. Please also have a look at
> the work in cws new_itemsets which tries to get rid of the old
> SfxItemSet implementation and replace it with stl container-based stuff
> whereever poss
Am Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:32:27 -0400
schrieb Andrew Douglas Pitonyak :
> Changing out SvArray, will fix this long standing bug, which will
> bring great joy and happiness to my life.
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=84159
Getting rid of SvArray might not be enough alone to fix
On 06/14/2010 07:05 AM, Bartosz wrote:
I thought I had a patch somewhere to do some of the conversion, but I
can't find it now. I remember that I didn't go ahead with it at the time
because my first cut at it left OOo larger than it was before hand,
which was an annoying result.
Great. If
On 14/06/2010 13:05, Bartosz wrote:
>> I thought I had a patch somewhere to do some of the conversion, but I
>> can't find it now. I remember that I didn't go ahead with it at the time
>> because my first cut at it left OOo larger than it was before hand,
>> which was an annoying result.
>
> Great
> I thought I had a patch somewhere to do some of the conversion, but I
> can't find it now. I remember that I didn't go ahead with it at the time
> because my first cut at it left OOo larger than it was before hand,
> which was an annoying result.
Great. If you could find this patch, it will be v
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 11:22 +0200, Michael Stahl wrote:
> the SvArrays should be replaced by appropriate STL types (mostly vector, i
> guess, but probably in some cases stacks or deques or something else).
deques I think was the best option in general the last time I looked at
this. Probably best
On 13/06/2010 22:36, Bartosz Kosiorek wrote:
> Hi.
hi Bartosz,
> In the
> http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/To-Dos#Replace_code_with_3rd_party
> there is section about "Replace self made containers with STL containers.
> SvPointerArray, BigPointerArray"
> But in higher section there is
18 matches
Mail list logo
