Re: [boost] [graph] dijkstra pull request ping

Subject: Re: [boost] [graph] dijkstra pull request ping
From: Marcin Zalewski (marcin.zalewski_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-10-22 09:11:03

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 5:55 PM alex <alexhighviz_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>
> > What do you mean by not evaluating decreased? Then we use decreased to
> > check which visitor function we should call, so I am not sure if one
> could
> get rid
> > of that without having two versions of the code (one for the "classical"
> version,
> > and one for an arbitrary distance map).
> >
>
> Sorry I am not clear. Yes, I do think that you should get rid of the
> redundant check. And, yes that would mean that if you want the arbitrary
> distance map, you should have two versions.
>

I would  only agree with that if we could demonstrate that there is a
statistically significant performance advantage of doing so. Looking at the
code, I am skeptical that this check has much or any impact on performance
on most modern platforms. Do you have any evidence that shows there would
be a benefit to having two versions of the code?