[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by add
From: |
nine . fierce . ballads |
Subject: |
Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden) |
Date: |
Fri, 31 Jan 2020 09:38:54 -0800 |
On 2020/01/30 23:22:46, hanwenn wrote:
> In the lily/ directory
>
> git grep 'vector<[^>]\+> &' *c|grep -v const
>
> returns 20 results, which is pretty small, given the number of methods
in the
> code base. A cursory inspection suggests that Mike introduced most of
these, and
> I would have probably suggested to use pointers there too. I would
also change
> these signatures if would stumble across them while refactoring
something else.
Wouldn't this policy tend toward crimes against readability like the
following?
void twiddle_vector(vector<int> *vec)
{
if (!vec || vec->empty ())
return;
for (size_t i = 0; i < vec->size() - 1; ++i)
{
if ((*vec)[i] < 10)
(*vec)[i] = (*vec)[i] + 2 * (*vec)[i + 1];
else
(*vec)[i] = (*vec)[i] * 2 - (*vec)[i + 1];
}
}
How would you approach that?
https://codereview.appspot.com/577410045/
- Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden), (continued)
- Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden), benko . pal, 2020/01/31
- Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/01/31
- Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden),
nine . fierce . ballads <=
- Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/01/31
- Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden), nine . fierce . ballads, 2020/01/31
- Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/01/31
- Re: Clean up embedded scheme parsing/evaluation. (issue 577410045 by address@hidden), Carl . D . Sorensen, 2020/01/31