<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [Patch] Skip XRef gaps in PDFDoc save methods" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107057#c3">Comment # 3</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - [Patch] Skip XRef gaps in PDFDoc save methods" href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=107057">bug 107057</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:haxtibal@posteo.de" title="Tobias Deiminger <haxtibal@posteo.de>"> Tobias Deiminger</a> <pre>(In reply to oliver.sander from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=107057#c2">comment #2</a>) > You are copying the objectIDs into a separate std::vector just to make your > loops look pretty. Could that have a negative impact on program run-time? I initially felt a bit bad because of that too. But after all, the new XRef::getObjectIds method is only called once on save, and saving is nothing that happens at high frequency. There are just plain ints in the intermediate vector, and the number of entries is usually small, say in the range 1..1024 (however, some extreme documents could have an extreme number of objects). Further, 'return objectIds' is basically a non op, because of copy elision / RVO. The alternative to assemble an intermediate vector are - implement input iterator on XRef - or change the underlying containment for XRef::entries to list or map - or something about coroutines :) I guess it's not worth it. But it needs a bit of poppler experience to judge about. What do you think?</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>