Second iteration of DKM
This commit is contained in:
@@ -9,23 +9,52 @@
|
||||
#ifndef GUARD_TOURMALINE_DUALKEYMAP_H
|
||||
#define GUARD_TOURMALINE_DUALKEYMAP_H
|
||||
#include <cstddef>
|
||||
#include <cstdint>
|
||||
#include <vector>
|
||||
|
||||
namespace Tourmaline::Containers {
|
||||
template <typename A, typename B, typename Value> class DualkeyMap {
|
||||
template <typename AKey, typename BKey, typename Value,
|
||||
uint64_t baseReservation = 1024,
|
||||
float reservationGrowthExponent = 1.5>
|
||||
class DualkeyMap {
|
||||
constexpr static uint64_t EmptyKey = -1;
|
||||
DualkeyMap() {
|
||||
ValueList.reserve(baseReservation);
|
||||
HashList.reserve(baseReservation);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
~DualkeyMap() {
|
||||
// I'm sure there is a better way to do this
|
||||
for (auto value : ValueList) {
|
||||
delete value;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
for (auto hash : HashList) {
|
||||
delete hash.Apointer;
|
||||
delete hash.Bpointer;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// No copying, No moving. Moving may be valid in the future.
|
||||
// However as of now it is not a wise way to use this map.
|
||||
DualkeyMap(const DualkeyMap &) = delete;
|
||||
DualkeyMap(DualkeyMap &&) = delete;
|
||||
DualkeyMap &operator=(const DualkeyMap &) = delete;
|
||||
DualkeyMap &operator=(DualkeyMap &&) = delete;
|
||||
|
||||
private:
|
||||
struct DualkeyHash {
|
||||
DualkeyHash(std::size_t AHash, A *APointer, std::size_t BHash, B *BPointer)
|
||||
DualkeyHash(std::size_t AHash, AKey *APointer, std::size_t BHash,
|
||||
BKey *BPointer)
|
||||
: AKeyHash(AHash), APointer(APointer), BKeyHash(BHash),
|
||||
BPointer(BPointer) {}
|
||||
std::size_t AKeyHash = 0;
|
||||
std::size_t BKeyHash = 0;
|
||||
A *APointer;
|
||||
B *BPointer;
|
||||
AKey *APointer;
|
||||
BKey *BPointer;
|
||||
};
|
||||
std::vector<Value *> ValueList;
|
||||
std::vector<DualkeyHash> HashList{};
|
||||
std::vector<DualkeyHash> HashList;
|
||||
};
|
||||
} // namespace Tourmaline::Containers
|
||||
#endif
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user