Skip to content

Why not one Route::label_hash? #215

Open
@yakra

Description

@yakra

Separate pri_label_hash and alt_label_hash make sense so we can get Note: deprecated route name in userlogs.
(Although, a single std::unordered_map<std::string,std::pair<Route*,bool>> with the bool distinguishing primary/alt might do the trick.)

But there's no such notification for AltLabels.
Could one hash should be sufficient?
Seems so, quickly looking at route_integrity.cpp & mark_*_route_segments.cpp.
Should be able to greatly simplify the insertion process in route_integrity.

  • OT: and while in there, convert those #defines to references.

Thought experiment: What happen{s,ed} with duplicate labels 1 pri + 1 alt, WRT the "unused" set & everything else...

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions