kicad-developers team mailing list archive

["Sergey A. Borshch" <sb-sf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 25.11.2011 23:30, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
> Isn't a std::set a little overweight for the layer mask? IIRC it's usually
> implemented as a btree (red-black trees in g++), and there is one for each pad
> at least in the board! A bitmasked int is a bit vector, which is a lot more
> efficient both in size and space. Also a bitmask is the very essence of a
> padstack (even if we do not handle them explicitly).

Use C++ power instead of wrangle. Just hide layer mask implementation inside class, and afterward 
you could easy play with different implementations without refactoring all source code. You could 
compare speed, size and other issues using real code, not only assumptions. You could start from 
easiest (faster to write) implementation (e.g. std:set), and begin to experiment with optimization 
(e.g. bit vector or something else) when all necessary functionality already achieved. All changes 
will be localized in one single class.

> - Actually the only things that can be on more than one layer are pads and
>    vias! Am I wrong?
I'm not sure, but, possibly, some sort of barriers?


--
Regards,
   Sergey A. Borshch            mailto: sb-sf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
     SB ELDI ltd. Riga, Latvia