ap_coloc isn't needed for every waypoint, only graph points.
It could conceivably be nixed, and stored in a std:pair with the corresponding waypoint in hi_priority_points & low_priority_points for graph generation.
Syntax might be a drag though, short of switching to C++17 & using structured bindings.
[ ] Do hi_priority_points & low_priority_points go out of scope, or hang around? When can these vectors be deleted or at least cleared?
sizeof would still be 104 on FreeBSD & 112 on Ubuntu. Still above the magic 96 B for fitting 2 objects in 3 cache lines.
88 B on CentOs though.
ap_colocisn't needed for every waypoint, only graph points. It could conceivably be nixed, and stored in astd:pairwith the corresponding waypoint inhi_priority_points&low_priority_pointsfor graph generation.Syntax might be a drag though, short of switching to C++17 & using structured bindings.
hi_priority_points&low_priority_pointsgo out of scope, or hang around? When can these vectors be deleted or at least cleared?sizeofwould still be 104 on FreeBSD & 112 on Ubuntu. Still above the magic 96 B for fitting 2 objects in 3 cache lines. 88 B on CentOs though.