Skip to content

Conversation

@reschke
Copy link
Contributor

@reschke reschke commented Dec 17, 2025

This eliminates the namespace walk; the prefixes are collected during the first (and now only) walk.

…er sibling nodes not contained in the filter(s)
@reschke reschke requested review from joerghoh, kwin and mbaedke December 17, 2025 09:52
@reschke reschke self-assigned this Dec 17, 2025
}
}
}

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

note to myself: that could include timing information

@cschneider
Copy link

LGTM

…er sibling nodes not contained in the filter(s) - duration logging
// respective aggregator building sub aggregates
while (nIter.hasNext()) {
Node n = nIter.nextNode();
visited += 1;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
visited += 1;
visited++;

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

hmmm... why? I'm a violating a style guide I'm not away of?

Copy link
Contributor

@joerghoh joerghoh Dec 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nope :-) In my opinion it's just more readable, as with "+=" I always need to parse the number behind it, while "++" is hardwired to "increase a counter" in my brain.
But I am nitpicking here :-)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants