-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Don't keep pointer to QgsPointCloudLayer in QgsPointCloudLayerRenderer and QgsPointCloudLayerProfileGenerator #60086
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
4c5775a
Don't keep pointer to QgsPointCloudLayer in QgsPointCloudLayerRenderer
dvdkon 185113b
Don't use data provider before we check it's non-null
dvdkon 3f8495a
Don't keep pointer to QgsPointCloudLayer in QgsPointCloudLayerProfile…
dvdkon a3866f4
Make thread check in QgsPointCloudLayer::dataProvider() fatal
dvdkon 4174255
Use correct index() method to use editing index
dvdkon ed28933
Initialize members
nyalldawson File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Just curious, is there a benefit of using
std::optional
instead of just aQgsPointCloudIndex()
/QgsPointCloudIndex( nullptr )
, which evaluates asfalse
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good catch. There isn't, I just personally default to using
std::optional
when a member can be explicitly left out, and don't much like puttingnullptr
in smart pointers.It is redundant (and probably inconsistent with the rest of the codebase), so if you think it's better, I'll change it to the bare index object.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's a nice habit I guess!
It would be ever slightly more readable without it, as
optional
is barely used in the codebase, but I don't have a strong opinion :)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd personally love to see optional used more often -- it's quite an elegant solution to some tricky API considerations... just so long as we don't need to worry about exposure to Python 🤣