Review Request: Review API of the new Path class

[Milian Wolff]

> On Jan. 5, 2013, 11:11 a.m., Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > project/path.h, line 311
> > <http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108196/diff/1/?file=104951#file104951line311>
> >
> >     Hmm, I think I'd separate the remote-url part from the path itself here. There are some places in the code where you have explicit checks for remote-urls and then take the first or second item from the list. Having a separate member would make that code a lot clearer.
> 
> Milian Wolff wrote:
>     I also thought about that but deliberately decided against it for space reasons (saving one pointer for local paths). But I agree that it might be a bit over-optimized. I'll revisit the code and take another look at it.
> 
> Andreas Pakulat wrote:
>     I see, but in this case I'd say optimization comes after code-readability. So once everythings ported we should measure the difference between saving the pointer or not and then decide wether saving it outweighs the special code in the various functions - at least IMO.
> 
> Milian Wolff wrote:
>     I did compare it back then but sadly I just realize that my results in the commits are not comparable: 949ed44e369d8d3ce798737f1a3517bc9fe48caa vs c6dca99c710f99c7ddbc47b00dd70157f7d3a076 also shows different numbers for the other datatypes... I'll redo the measurement and figure out whether it's worth it.

Looking at it again, I have to say that the code readability would not increase considerably imo... Especially since you'd now have to compare/check two variables instead of just one the code becomes bigger which is arguably also worse to read.

And so far only 6 places or so need to take special care when dealing with the aggregated prefix-in-m_data. Imo this is not so bad and I'd like to keep it as-is.


- Milian


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108196/#review24736
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 5, 2013, 10:59 a.m., Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108196/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 5, 2013, 10:59 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDevelop.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Discuss API of the new Path class
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   project/path.h PRE-CREATION 
>   project/path.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108196/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Andreas Pakulat
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20130106/764cdb96/attachment-0001.html>