From 3c0e38aacb8ea10eda1a8d64578868da10170aff Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: jeremy Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 13:54:26 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Adapt comment --- src/query/v2/multiframe.cpp | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/query/v2/multiframe.cpp b/src/query/v2/multiframe.cpp index 65829fe5e..022e0725d 100644 --- a/src/query/v2/multiframe.cpp +++ b/src/query/v2/multiframe.cpp @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ MultiFrame::~MultiFrame() = default; MultiFrame::MultiFrame(const MultiFrame &other) : default_frame_(other.default_frame_) { /* - #NoCommit maybe not needed + TODO Do we just copy all frames or do we make distinctions between valid and not valid frames? Does it make any difference? */ @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ MultiFrame::MultiFrame(const MultiFrame &other) : default_frame_(other.default_f MultiFrame::MultiFrame(MultiFrame &&other) noexcept : default_frame_(std::move(other.default_frame_)) { /* - #NoCommit maybe not needed + TODO Do we just copy all frames or do we make distinctions between valid and not valid frames? Does it make any difference? */ @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ ValidFramesModifier::Iterator ValidFramesModifier::end() { ValidFramesConsumer::ValidFramesConsumer(MultiFrame &multiframe) : multiframe_(multiframe) {} ValidFramesConsumer::~ValidFramesConsumer() { - // #NoCommit possible optimisation: only DefragmentValidFrames if one frame has been invalidated? Only if does not + // TODO Possible optimisation: only DefragmentValidFrames if one frame has been invalidated? Only if does not // cost too much to store it multiframe_.DefragmentValidFrames(); }