<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi Sean,</div><div><br></div>In my opinion leave it in, we should start preferring preincrement, so don't suppress the warning..<div><br></div><div>The reasons are:</div><div>1) It alerts coders to performance issues.</div><div>2) VTK is huge and anything that improves the code base is a good thing as it makes future maintenance easier.</div><div>3) Warnings like this alert users to possible future issues.</div><div><br></div><div>Where I have edited code, I have corrected issues like this.</div><div><br></div><div>As an aside I also can't wait for range-based for loops and auto to be used in VTK! Roll on C++11.</div><div><br></div><div>BTW Your coding standards link makes really interesting reading.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards</div><div> Andrew<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 4:00 AM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vtk-developers-request@vtk.org" target="_blank">vtk-developers-request@vtk.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send vtk-developers mailing list submissions to<br>---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: Sean McBride <<a href="mailto:sean@rogue-research.com">sean@rogue-research.com</a>><br>To: <<a href="mailto:vtk-developers@vtk.org">vtk-developers@vtk.org</a>><br>Cc: <br>Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 12:24:00 -0500<br>Subject: [vtk-developers] Coding style question: pre vs post increment operators (i++ vs ++i)<br>Hi all,<br>
<br>
cppcheck has a warning where it suggests "performance: Prefer prefix ++/-- operators for non-primitive types":<br>
<br>
<<a href="https://open.cdash.org/viewBuildError.php?type=1&buildid=4710441" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://open.cdash.org/<wbr>viewBuildError.php?type=1&<wbr>buildid=4710441</a>><br>
<br>
The LLVM coding standards, for example, have a similar policy (and explanation):<br>
<br>
<<a href="http://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#prefer-preincrement" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://llvm.org/docs/<wbr>CodingStandards.html#prefer-<wbr>preincrement</a>><br>
<br>
cppcheck gives bazillions of such warnings in VTK and I originally suppressed them all. More recently, I now suppress only some folders, leaving the warning enabled for those folders where there are no warnings currently. This has the effect therefore of such warnings now popping up for new code or changes to previously warning-free code (as seen on the dashboard now).<br>
<br>
What do we want to do? Start preferring preincrement (for non-primitive types!) in new code? or I suppress the warning entirely?<br>
<br>
(When we start allowing C++11 using range-based for will eliminate many such increments, but leaving that aside...)<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
--<br>
______________________________<wbr>______________________________<br>
Sean McBride, B. Eng <a href="mailto:sean@rogue-research.com">sean@rogue-research.com</a><br>
Rogue Research <a href="http://www.rogue-research.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">www.rogue-research.com</a><br>
Mac Software Developer Montréal, Québec, Canada<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><br></blockquote></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">___________________________________________<br>Andrew J. P. Maclean<br><br>___________________________________________</div>
</div></div></div>