Search Results

Search found 8262 results on 331 pages for 'optimization algorithm'.

Page 167/331 | < Previous Page | 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174  | Next Page >

  • How do I select a random record efficiently in MySQL?

    - by user198729
    mysql> EXPLAIN SELECT * FROM urls ORDER BY RAND() LIMIT 1; +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+-------+---------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+-------+---------------------------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | urls | ALL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | 62228 | Using temporary; Using filesort | +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+-------+---------------------------------+ The above doesn't qualify as efficient,how should I do it properly?

    Read the article

  • Word frequency tally script is too slow

    - by Dave Jarvis
    Background Created a script to count the frequency of words in a plain text file. The script performs the following steps: Count the frequency of words from a corpus. Retain each word in the corpus found in a dictionary. Create a comma-separated file of the frequencies. The script is at: http://pastebin.com/VAZdeKXs Problem The following lines continually cycle through the dictionary to match words: for i in $(awk '{if( $2 ) print $2}' frequency.txt); do grep -m 1 ^$i\$ dictionary.txt >> corpus-lexicon.txt; done It works, but it is slow because it is scanning the words it found to remove any that are not in the dictionary. The code performs this task by scanning the dictionary for every single word. (The -m 1 parameter stops the scan when the match is found.) Question How would you optimize the script so that the dictionary is not scanned from start to finish for every single word? The majority of the words will not be in the dictionary. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • MySQL Datefields: duplicate or calculate?

    - by Konerak
    We are using a table with a structure imposed upon us more than 10 years ago. We are allowed to add columns, but urged not to change existing columns. Certain columns are meant to represent dates, but are put in different format. Amongst others: * CHAR(6): YYMMDD * CHAR(6): DDMMYY * CHAR(8): YYYYMMDD * CHAR(8): DDMMYYYY * DATE * DATETIME Since we now would like to do some more complex queries, using advanced date functions, my manager proposed to d*uplicate those problem columns* to a proper FORMATTED_OLDCOLUMNNAME column using a DATE or DATETIME format. Is this the way to go? Couldn't we just use the STR_TO_DATE function each time we accessed the columns? To avoid every query having to copy-paste the function, I could still work with a view or a stored procedure, but duplicating data to avoid recalculation sounds wrong. Solutions I see (I guess I prefer 2.2.1) 1. Physically duplicate columns 1.1 In the same table 1.1.1 Added by each script that does a modification (INSERT/UPDATE/REPLACE/...) 1.1.2 Maintained by a trigger on each modification 1.2 In a separate table 1.2.1 Added by each script that does a modification (INSERT/UPDATE/REPLACE/...) 1.2.2 Maintained by a trigger on each modification 2. On-demand transformation 2.1 Each query has to perform the transformation 2.1.1 Using copy-paste in the source code 2.1.2 Using a library 2.1.3 Using a STORED PROCEDURE 2.2 A view performs the transformation 2.2.1 A separate table replacing the entire table 2.2.2 A separate table just adding the date-fields for the primary keys Am I right to say it's better to recalculate than to store? And would a view be a good solution?

    Read the article

  • MySQL, delete and index hint

    - by Manuel Darveau
    I have to delete about 10K rows from a table that has more than 100 million rows based on some criteria. When I execute the query, it takes about 5 minutes. I ran an explain plan (the delete query converted to select * since MySQL does not support explain delete) and found that MySQL uses the wrong index. My question is: is there any way to tell MySQL which index to use during delete? If not, what ca I do? Select to temp table then delete from temp table? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • C++ DWORD* to BYTE*

    - by NomeSkavinski
    My issue, i am trying to convert and array of dynamic memory of type DWORD to a BYTE. Fair enough i can for loop through this and convert the DWORD into a BYTE per entry. But is their a faster way to do this? to take a pointer to DWORD data and convert the whole piece of data into a pointer to BYTE data? such as using a memcpy operation? I feel this is not possible, im not requesting an answer just an experienced opinion on my approach, as i have tried testing both approaches but seem to fail getting to a solution on my second solution. Thanks for any input, again no answers just a point in the right direction. Nor is this a homework question, i felt that had to be mentioned.

    Read the article

  • Specific template for the first element.

    - by Kalinin
    I have a template: <xsl:template match="paragraph"> ... </xsl:template> I call it: <xsl:apply-templates select="paragraph"/> For the first element I need to do: <xsl:template match="paragraph[1]"> ... <xsl:apply-templates select="."/><!-- I understand that this does not work --> ... </xsl:template> How to call <xsl:apply-templates select="paragraph"/> (for the first element paragraph) from the template <xsl:template match="paragraph[1]">? So far that I have something like a loop. I solve this problem so (but I do not like it): <xsl:for-each select="paragraph"> <xsl:choose> <xsl:when test="position() = 1"> ... <xsl:apply-templates select="."/> ... </xsl:when> <xsl:otherwise> <xsl:apply-templates select="."/> </xsl:otherwise> </xsl:choose> </xsl:for-each>

    Read the article

  • Is count(*) really expensive ?

    - by Anil Namde
    I have a page where I have 4 tabs displaying 4 different reports based off different tables. I obtain the row count of each table using a select count(*) from <table> query and display number of rows available in each table on the tabs. As a result, each page postback causes 5 count(*) queries to be executed (4 to get counts and 1 for pagination) and 1 query for getting the report content. Now my question is: are count(*) queries really expensive -- should I keep the row counts (at least those that are displayed on the tab) in the view state of page instead of querying multiple times? How expensive are COUNT(*) queries ?

    Read the article

  • Why isn't the copy constructor elided here?

    - by Jesse Beder
    (I'm using gcc with -O2.) This seems like a straightforward opportunity to elide the copy constructor, since there are no side-effects to accessing the value of a field in a bar's copy of a foo; but the copy constructor is called, since I get the output meep meep!. #include <iostream> struct foo { foo(): a(5) { } foo(const foo& f): a(f.a) { std::cout << "meep meep!\n"; } int a; }; struct bar { foo F() const { return f; } foo f; }; int main() { bar b; int a = b.F().a; return 0; }

    Read the article

  • File IO with Streams - Best Memory Buffer Size

    - by AJ
    I am writing a small IO library to assist with a larger (hobby) project. A part of this library performs various functions on a file, which is read / written via the FileStream object. On each StreamReader.Read(...) pass, I fire off an event which will be used in the main app to display progress information. The processing that goes on in the loop is vaired, but is not too time consuming (it could just be a simple file copy, for example, or may involve encryption...). My main question is: What is the best memory buffer size to use? Thinking about physical disk layouts, I could pick 2k, which would cover a CD sector size and is a nice multiple of a 512 byte hard disk sector. Higher up the abstraction tree, you could go for a larger buffer which could read an entire FAT cluster at a time. I realise with today's PC's, I could go for a more memory hungry option (a couple of MiB, for example), but then I increase the time between UI updates and the user perceives a less responsive app. As an aside, I'm eventually hoping to provide a similar interface to files hosted on FTP / HTTP servers (over a local network / fastish DSL). What would be the best memory buffer size for those (again, a "best-case" tradeoff between perceived responsiveness vs. performance).

    Read the article

  • how to avoid temporaries when copying weakly typed object

    - by Truncheon
    Hi. I'm writing a series classes that inherit from a base class using virtual. They are INT, FLOAT and STRING objects that I want to use in a scripting language. I'm trying to implement weak typing, but I don't want STRING objects to return copies of themselves when used in the following way (instead I would prefer to have a reference returned which can be used in copying): a = "hello "; b = "world"; c = a + b; I have written the following code as a mock example: #include <iostream> #include <string> #include <cstdio> #include <cstdlib> std::string dummy("<int object cannot return string reference>"); struct BaseImpl { virtual bool is_string() = 0; virtual int get_int() = 0; virtual std::string get_string_copy() = 0; virtual std::string const& get_string_ref() = 0; }; struct INT : BaseImpl { int value; INT(int i = 0) : value(i) { std::cout << "constructor called\n"; } INT(BaseImpl& that) : value(that.get_int()) { std::cout << "copy constructor called\n"; } bool is_string() { return false; } int get_int() { return value; } std::string get_string_copy() { char buf[33]; sprintf(buf, "%i", value); return buf; } std::string const& get_string_ref() { return dummy; } }; struct STRING : BaseImpl { std::string value; STRING(std::string s = "") : value(s) { std::cout << "constructor called\n"; } STRING(BaseImpl& that) { if (that.is_string()) value = that.get_string_ref(); else value = that.get_string_copy(); std::cout << "copy constructor called\n"; } bool is_string() { return true; } int get_int() { return atoi(value.c_str()); } std::string get_string_copy() { return value; } std::string const& get_string_ref() { return value; } }; struct Base { BaseImpl* impl; Base(BaseImpl* p = 0) : impl(p) {} ~Base() { delete impl; } }; int main() { Base b1(new INT(1)); Base b2(new STRING("Hello world")); Base b3(new INT(*b1.impl)); Base b4(new STRING(*b2.impl)); std::cout << "\n"; std::cout << b1.impl->get_int() << "\n"; std::cout << b2.impl->get_int() << "\n"; std::cout << b3.impl->get_int() << "\n"; std::cout << b4.impl->get_int() << "\n"; std::cout << "\n"; std::cout << b1.impl->get_string_ref() << "\n"; std::cout << b2.impl->get_string_ref() << "\n"; std::cout << b3.impl->get_string_ref() << "\n"; std::cout << b4.impl->get_string_ref() << "\n"; std::cout << "\n"; std::cout << b1.impl->get_string_copy() << "\n"; std::cout << b2.impl->get_string_copy() << "\n"; std::cout << b3.impl->get_string_copy() << "\n"; std::cout << b4.impl->get_string_copy() << "\n"; return 0; } It was necessary to add an if check in the STRING class to determine whether its safe to request a reference instead of a copy: Script code: a = "test"; b = a; c = 1; d = "" + c; /* not safe to request reference by standard */ C++ code: STRING(BaseImpl& that) { if (that.is_string()) value = that.get_string_ref(); else value = that.get_string_copy(); std::cout << "copy constructor called\n"; } If was hoping there's a way of moving that if check into compile time, rather than run time.

    Read the article

  • Will an optimizing compiler remove calls to a method whose result will be multiplied by zero?

    - by Tim R.
    Suppose you have a computationally expensive method, Compute(p), which returns some float, and another method, Falloff(p), which returns another float from zero to one. If you compute Falloff(p) * Compute(p), will Compute(p) still run when Falloff(p) returns zero? Or would you need to write a special case to prevent Compute(p) from running unnecessarily? Theoretically, an optimizing compiler could determine that omitting Compute when Falloff returns zero would have no effect on the program. However, this is kind of hard to test, since if you have Compute output some debug data to determine whether it is running, the compiler would know not to omit it because of that debug info, resulting in sort of a Schrodinger's cat situation. I know the safe solution to this problem is just to add the special case, but I'm just curious.

    Read the article

  • Get count matches in query on large table very slow

    - by Roy Roes
    I have a mysql table "items" with 2 integer fields: seid and tiid The table has about 35000000 records, so it's very large. seid tiid ----------- 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 3 4 4 1 4 2 The table has a primary key on both fields, an index on seid and an index on tiid. Someone types in 1 or more tiid values and now I would like to get the seid with most results. For example when someone types 1,2,3, I would like to get seid 2 and 4 as result. They both have 2 matches on the tiid values. My query so far: SELECT COUNT(*) as c, seid FROM items WHERE tiid IN (1,2,3) GROUP BY seid HAVING c = (SELECT COUNT(*) as c, seid FROM items WHERE tiid IN (1,2,3) GROUP BY seid ORDER BY c DESC LIMIT 1) But this query is extremly slow, because of the large table. Does anyone know how to construct a better query for this purpose?

    Read the article

  • Ternary Operators in JavaScript Without an "Else"

    - by Oscar Godson
    I've been using them forever, and I love them. To me they see cleaner and i can scan faster, but ever since I've been using them i've always had to put null in the else conditions that don't have anything. Is there anyway around it? E.g. condition ? x=true : null ; basically, is there a way to do: condition ? x=true; Now it shows up as a syntax error...

    Read the article

  • Optimizing sparse dot-product in C#

    - by Haggai
    Hello. I'm trying to calculate the dot-product of two very sparse associative arrays. The arrays contain an ID and a value, so the calculation should be done only on those IDs that are common to both arrays, e.g. <(1, 0.5), (3, 0.7), (12, 1.3) * <(2, 0.4), (3, 2.3), (12, 4.7) = 0.7*2.3 + 1.3*4.7 . My implementation (call it dict) currently uses Dictionaries, but it is too slow to my taste. double dot_product(IDictionary<int, double> arr1, IDictionary<int, double> arr2) { double res = 0; double val2; foreach (KeyValuePair<int, double> p in arr1) if (arr2.TryGetValue(p.Key, out val2)) res += p.Value * val2; return res; } The full arrays have about 500,000 entries each, while the sparse ones are only tens to hundreds entries each. I did some experiments with toy versions of dot products. First I tried to multiply just two double arrays to see the ultimate speed I can get (let's call this "flat"). Then I tried to change the implementation of the associative array multiplication using an int[] ID array and a double[] values array, walking together on both ID arrays and multiplying when they are equal (let's call this "double"). I then tried to run all three versions with debug or release, with F5 or Ctrl-F5. The results are as follows: debug F5: dict: 5.29s double: 4.18s (79% of dict) flat: 0.99s (19% of dict, 24% of double) debug ^F5: dict: 5.23s double: 4.19s (80% of dict) flat: 0.98s (19% of dict, 23% of double) release F5: dict: 5.29s double: 3.08s (58% of dict) flat: 0.81s (15% of dict, 26% of double) release ^F5: dict: 4.62s double: 1.22s (26% of dict) flat: 0.29s ( 6% of dict, 24% of double) I don't understand these results. Why isn't the dictionary version optimized in release F5 as do the double and flat versions? Why is it only slightly optimized in the release ^F5 version while the other two are heavily optimized? Also, since converting my code into the "double" scheme would mean lots of work - do you have any suggestions how to optimize the dictionary one? Thanks! Haggai

    Read the article

  • SQL Database dilemma : Optimize for Querying or Writing?

    - by Harry
    I'm working on a personal project (Search engine) and have a bit of a dilemma. At the moment it is optimized for writing data to the search index and significantly slow for search queries. The DTA (Database Engine Tuning Adviser) recommends adding a couple of Indexed views inorder to speed up search queries. But this is to the detriment of writing new data to the DB. It seems I can't have one without the other! This is obviously not a new problem. What is a good strategy for this issue?

    Read the article

  • Calculating Growth-Rates by applying log-differences

    - by mropa
    I am trying to transform my data.frame by calculating the log-differences of each column and controlling for the rows id. So basically I like to calculate the growth rates for each id's variable. So here is a random df with an id column, a time period colum p and three variable columns: df <- data.frame (id = c("a","a","a","c","c","d","d","d","d","d"), p = c(1,2,3,1,2,1,2,3,4,5), var1 = rnorm(10, 5), var2 = rnorm(10, 5), var3 = rnorm(10, 5) ) df id p var1 var2 var3 1 a 1 5.375797 4.110324 5.773473 2 a 2 4.574700 6.541862 6.116153 3 a 3 3.029428 4.931924 5.631847 4 c 1 5.375855 4.181034 5.756510 5 c 2 5.067131 6.053009 6.746442 6 d 1 3.846438 4.515268 6.920389 7 d 2 4.910792 5.525340 4.625942 8 d 3 6.410238 5.138040 7.404533 9 d 4 4.637469 3.522542 3.661668 10 d 5 5.519138 4.599829 5.566892 Now I have written a function which does exactly what I want BUT I had to take a detour which is possibly unnecessary and can be removed. However, somehow I am not able to locate the shortcut. Here is the function and the output for the posted data frame: fct.logDiff <- function (df) { df.log <- dlply (df, "code", function(x) data.frame (p = x$p, log(x[, -c(1,2)]))) list.nalog <- llply (df.log, function(x) data.frame (p = x$p, rbind(NA, sapply(x[,-1], diff)))) ldply (list.nalog, data.frame) } fct.logDiff(df) id p var1 var2 var3 1 a 1 NA NA NA 2 a 2 -0.16136569 0.46472004 0.05765945 3 a 3 -0.41216720 -0.28249264 -0.08249587 4 c 1 NA NA NA 5 c 2 -0.05914281 0.36999681 0.15868378 6 d 1 NA NA NA 7 d 2 0.24428771 0.20188025 -0.40279188 8 d 3 0.26646102 -0.07267311 0.47041227 9 d 4 -0.32372771 -0.37748866 -0.70417351 10 d 5 0.17405309 0.26683625 0.41891802 The trouble is due to the added NA-rows. I don't want to collapse the frame and reduce it, which would be automatically done by the diff() function. So I had 10 rows in my original frame and am keeping the same amount of rows after the transformation. In order to keep the same length I had to add some NAs. I have taken a detour by transforming the data.frame into a list, add the NAs, and afterwards transform the list back into a data.frame. That looks tedious. Any ideas to avoid the data.frame-list-data.frame class transformation and optimize the function?

    Read the article

  • negative values in integer programming model

    - by Lucia
    I'm new at using the glpk tool, and after writing a model for certain integer problem and running the solver (glpsol) i get negative values in some constraint that shouldn't be negative at all: No.Row name Activity Lower bound Upper bound 8 act[1] 0 -0 9 act[2] -3 -0 10 act[2] -2 -0 That constraint is defined like this: act{j in J}: sum{i in I} d[i,j] <= y[j]*m; where the sets and variables used are like this: param m, integer, 0; param n, integer, 0; set I := 1..m; set J := 1..n; var y{j in J}, binary; As the upper bound is negative, i think the problem may be in the y[j]*m parte, of the right side of the inequality.. perhaps something with the multiplication of binarys? or that the j in that side of the constrait is undefined? i dont know... i would be greatly grateful if someone can help me with this! :) and excuse for my bad english thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Efficiently draw a grid in Windows Forms

    - by Joel
    I'm writing an implementation of Conway's Game of Life in C#. This is the code I'm using to draw the grid, it's in my panel_Paint event. g is the graphics context. for (int y = 0; y < numOfCells * cellSize; y += cellSize) { for (int x = 0; x < numOfCells * cellSize; x += cellSize) { g.DrawLine(p, x, 0, x, y + numOfCells * cellSize); g.DrawLine(p, 0, x, y + size * drawnGrid, x); } } When I run my program, it is unresponsive until it finishes drawing the grid, which takes a few seconds at numOfCells = 100 & cellSize = 10. Removing all the multiplication makes it faster, but not by very much. Is there a better/more efficient way to draw my grid? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Optimize SQL query (Facebook-like application)

    - by fabriciols
    My application is similar to Facebook, and I'm trying to optimize the query that get user records. The user records are that he as src ou dst. The src is in usermuralentry directly, the dst list are in usermuralentry_user. So, a entry can have one src and many dst. I have those tables: mysql> desc usermuralentry ; +-----------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-----------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | user_src_id | int(11) | NO | MUL | NULL | | | private | tinyint(1) | NO | | NULL | | | content | longtext | NO | | NULL | | | date | datetime | NO | | NULL | | | last_update | datetime | NO | | NULL | | +-----------------+------------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ 10 rows in set (0.10 sec) mysql> desc usermuralentry_user ; +-------------------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-------------------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | usermuralentry_id | int(11) | NO | MUL | NULL | | | userinfo_id | int(11) | NO | MUL | NULL | | +-------------------+---------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ 3 rows in set (0.00 sec) And the following query to retrieve information from two users. mysql> explain SELECT * FROM usermuralentry AS a , usermuralentry_user AS b WHERE a.user_src_id IN ( 1, 2 ) OR ( a.id = b.usermuralentry_id AND b.userinfo_id IN ( 1, 2 ) ); +----+-------------+-------+------+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+------+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | b | ALL | usermuralentry_id,usermuralentry_user_bcd7114e,usermuralentry_user_6b192ca7 | NULL | NULL | NULL | 147188 | | | 1 | SIMPLE | a | ALL | PRIMARY | NULL | NULL | NULL | 1371289 | Range checked for each record (index map: 0x1) | +----+-------------+-------+------+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+------+---------+------+---------+------------------------------------------------+ 2 rows in set (0.00 sec) but it is taking A LOT of time... Some tips to optimize? Can the table schema be better in my application?

    Read the article

  • How to make this JavaScript much faster?

    - by Ralph
    Still trying to answer this question, and I think I finally found a solution, but it runs too slow. var $div = $('<div>') .css({ 'border': '1px solid red', 'position': 'absolute', 'z-index': '65535' }) .appendTo('body'); $('body *').live('mousemove', function(e) { var topElement = null; $('body *').each(function() { if(this == $div[0]) return true; var $elem = $(this); var pos = $elem.offset(); var width = $elem.width(); var height = $elem.height(); if(e.pageX > pos.left && e.pageY > pos.top && e.pageX < (pos.left + width) && e.pageY < (pos.top + height)) { var zIndex = document.defaultView.getComputedStyle(this, null).getPropertyValue('z-index'); if(zIndex == 'auto') zIndex = $elem.parents().length; if(topElement == null || zIndex > topElement.zIndex) { topElement = { 'node': $elem, 'zIndex': zIndex }; } } }); if(topElement != null ) { var $elem = topElement.node; $div.offset($elem.offset()).width($elem.width()).height($elem.height()); } }); It basically loops through all the elements on the page and finds the top-most element beneath the cursor. Is there maybe some way I could use a quad-tree or something and segment the page so the loop runs faster?

    Read the article

  • Has anyone ever successfully make index merge work for MySQL?

    - by user198729
    Setup: mysql> create table t(a integer unsigned,b integer unsigned); mysql> insert into t(a,b) values (1,2),(1,3),(2,4); mysql> create index i_t_a on t(a); mysql> create index i_t_b on t(b); mysql> explain select * from t where a=1 or b=4; +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | t | ALL | i_t_a,i_t_b | NULL | NULL | NULL | 3 | Using where | +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ Is there something I'm missing? Update mysql> explain select * from t where a=1 or b=4; +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | t | ALL | i_t_a,i_t_b | NULL | NULL | NULL | 1863 | Using where | +----+-------------+-------+------+---------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ Version: mysql> select version(); +----------------------+ | version() | +----------------------+ | 5.1.36-community-log | +----------------------+ Has anyone ever successfully make index merge work for MySQL? I'll be glad to see successful stories here:)

    Read the article

  • C++ performance, optimizing compiler, empty function in .cpp

    - by Dodo
    I've a very basic class, name it Basic, used in nearly all other files in a bigger project. In some cases, there needs to be debug output, but in release mode, this should not be enabled and be a NOOP. Currently there is a define in the header, which switches a makro on or off, depending on the setting. So this is definetely a NOOP, when switched off. I'm wondering, if I have the following code, if a compiler (MSVS / gcc) is able to optimize out the function call, so that it is again a NOOP. (By doing that, the switch could be in the .cpp and switching will be much faster, compile/link time wise). --Header-- void printDebug(const Basic* p); class Basic { Basic() { simpleSetupCode; // this should be a NOOP in release, // but constructor could be inlined printDebug(this); } }; --Source-- // PRINT_DEBUG defined somewhere else or here #if PRINT_DEBUG void printDebug(const Basic* p) { // Lengthy debug print } #else void printDebug(const Basic* p) {} #endif

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174  | Next Page >