You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
ap_coloc isn't needed for every waypoint, only graph points.
It could conceivably be nixed, and stored in a std:pair with the corresponding waypoint in hi_priority_points & low_priority_points for graph generation.
Syntax might be a drag though, short of switching to C++17 & using structured bindings.
Do hi_priority_points & low_priority_points go out of scope, or hang around? When can these vectors be deleted or at least cleared?
sizeof would still be 104 on FreeBSD & 112 on Ubuntu. Still above the magic 96 B for fitting 2 objects in 3 cache lines.
88 B on CentOs though.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
ap_coloc
isn't needed for every waypoint, only graph points.It could conceivably be nixed, and stored in a
std:pair
with the corresponding waypoint inhi_priority_points
&low_priority_points
for graph generation.Syntax might be a drag though, short of switching to C++17 & using structured bindings.
hi_priority_points
&low_priority_points
go out of scope, or hang around? When can these vectors be deleted or at least cleared?sizeof
would still be 104 on FreeBSD & 112 on Ubuntu. Still above the magic 96 B for fitting 2 objects in 3 cache lines.88 B on CentOs though.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: