Refactor ValueTransformer and WBaseWidget
#13853
Conversation
Swiftb0y
force-pushed
the
refactor/valuetransformer
branch
from
edb85f9
to
3974c37
Compare
Swiftb0y
force-pushed
the
refactor/valuetransformer
branch
5 times, most recently
from
26ca2b0
to
abf5fe6
Compare
This is prep for the follow up commit to make it lighter.
This ensures that if a connection is a DisplayConnection then it is also added to the other connections. This improves memory safety as well as usability because it makes it impossible to accidentally set a connection as DisplayConnection that is not tracked by the WBaseWidget.
Swiftb0y
force-pushed
the
refactor/valuetransformer
branch
from
66aef70
to
3aea4ed
Compare
|
friendly ping @daschuer |
src/util/valuetransformer.cpp
Outdated
| argument = pNode->transformInverse(argument); | ||
| } | ||
| return argument; | ||
| return std::accumulate(m_transformers.crbegin(), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The semantic of std::accumulate does not fit here:
Computes the sum of the given value ...
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/algorithm/accumulate
In addition a range based loop is much easier to read.
Please adjust transform above as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well, it does a reduce in a well defined order. std::reduce rearranges the order and would be unsuitable here. IMO it fits perfectly compared to the eyesore that is the reverse for-loop. I will see if I can make it work with a ranges reverse view and a ranged for loop, but I don't want to revert to the index-based for loop again.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
std::ranges::reverse_view suits. Hopefully old compilers doe not bite us. Else a rbegin() solution is also fine.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
right, so in case reverse_view doesn't work out, you'd prefer a for-loop over reverse iterators?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, I would prefer the reverse iterators in that case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Whoops, suboptimal wording. I was asking whether you prefer
for (auto it = m_transformers.crbegin(); it != m_transformers.crend(); it++) {
// etc
};instead of the std::accumulate
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, so its macOS again... please suggest your preferred alternative.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The first with the reverse iterators. This is IMHO the most describtive version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't particularly agree because we're now just copy-pasting the std::accumulate implementation into there, but whatever you prefer...
Swiftb0y
force-pushed
the
refactor/valuetransformer
branch
from
1baf659
to
13fb48e
Compare
|
Thank you. |
extracted a commit from #13687 and fixed a TODO there (which in turn led to far bigger changes again).