CMap efficiency

[econy]

Hi, if Key-Value pairs are like:

40000 "40000 is a first number"
41020 "41020 is a second number"
....

use CMapStringToString or CMap to store. Then which one is better in look up efficiency? CMapStringToString　ｏｒ　CMap

[jeron1]

econy wrote:

Then which one is better in look up efficiency?

I don't know, but I cannot imagine having to convert between ints and CStrings just to use the CMapStringToString could possibly be worth it, I would start with the CMap.

[CPallini]

Why don't you test that?

Veni, vidi, vici.

[Stefan_Lang]

Lookup requires comparing keys, i. e. calling the operator < and maybe operator ==. Since these operators are more efficient for ints than they are for strings, I suspect that CMap is better. However, the rest of the looking-up algorithm that does not involve comparing keys may play a much more significant role on performance overall, so you might not notice a difference. You should also consider whether there are other operations than looking up which are called often, e. g. insertion, removal, converting keys to different formats, etc.: E. g. if you spend a lot of time reading keys from a text source or writing them as text, then it may be advisable to just stick with string keys rather than converting them back and forth all the time!

GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto) Point in case: http://www.infoq.com/news/2014/02/apple_gotofail_lessons[^]