added get_block_header issue #262 #263
Conversation
| for (const uint32_t& i : block_num) { | ||
| auto result = _db.fetch_block_by_number(i); | ||
| if (result) | ||
| results[i] = *result; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please excuse this comment - I am not much a C++ dev - but shouldn't we prefer results.push_back(result) over using pointers?
That way you can also push a null object, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thank you for the comment @xeroc . you might be right but i used the same code as get_block_header:
optional<block_header> database_api_impl::get_block_header(uint32_t block_num) const
{
auto result = _db.fetch_block_by_number(block_num);
if(result)
return *result;
return {};
}
adding @vikramrajkumar can probably help decide.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
results[i] = *result; is correct because results is a map, and the null result is handled in the subsequent line results[i] = {};
A minor suggestion for the future: in this case you can prefer uint32_t instead of uint32_t& in the range-based for loop. Since uint32 i is a small native type, it is more efficient to copy the value for each iteration of the loop.
No description provided.