uagws at student.kit.edu
Mon May 12 23:36:44 CEST 2014
> I believe in the worst case the graph takes
> almost twice as much memory as needed.
It's actually worse than that: std::vector never decreases it's size
unless this is explicitly requested:
assert(vec.capacity() >= 100);
The assert is guaranteed by the iso-standard not to fail.
> So this could be an important improvement. I say
> „could“ because there is one thing that needs to be checked, namely whether
> shrinking significantly increases construction time.
construction time of what? Copy-Ctors don't care for the capacity of the
object they copy.
> If it does we need to see
> if we want to make the tradeoff.
I would recommend implementing this with a shrinkToFit-method that is to
be called by the user (basically exactly the same that std::vector
does), so that there really wouldn't be a tradeoff. (Graph has so many
methods, this one, that unlike many others really cannot be reasonably
implemented as a free function, won't be a problem there).
-------------- n?chster Teil --------------
Ein Dateianhang mit Bin?rdaten wurde abgetrennt...
Dateiname : signature.asc
Dateityp : application/pgp-signature
Dateigr??e : 901 bytes
Beschreibung: OpenPGP digital signature
URL : <https://lists.ira.uni-karlsruhe.de/mailman/private/networkit/attachments/20140512/a4abc2c4/attachment-0001.sig>
More information about the NetworKit