QHashIterator in c++ - c++

Question

I developed a game in C++, and want to make sure everything is properly done.
Is it a good solution to use a QHashIterator to check which item in the list has the lowest value (F-cost for pathfinding).
Snippet from my code:
while(!pathFound){ //do while path is found
QHashIterator<int, PathFinding*> iterator(openList);
PathFinding* parent;
iterator.next();
parent = iterator.value();
while(iterator.hasNext()){ //we take the next tile, and we take the one with the lowest value
iterator.next();
//checking lowest f value
if((iterator.value()->getGcost() + iterator.value()->getHcost()) < (parent->getGcost() + parent->getHcost())){
parent = iterator.value();
}
}
if(!atDestionation(parent,endPoint)){ //here we check if we are at the destionation. if we are we return our pathcost.
clearLists(parent);
filllists(parent,endPoint);
}else{
pathFound = true;
while(parent->hasParent()){
mylist.append(parent);
parent = parent->getParent();
}
pathcost = calculatePathCost(mylist); //we calculate what the pathcost is and return it
}
}
If no? Are there better improvements?
I also found someting about the std::priority_queue. It this mutch better then a QHashIterator?
It's maybe not a problem with gameworld where there which are not big. But i'm looking for a suitable solution when the game worlds are big (like + 10000 calculations).Any marks?

Answer 1

Here you basically scan the whole map to find the element that is the minimum one according to some values:
while(iterator.hasNext()){ //we take the next tile, and we take the one with the lowest value
iterator.next();
//checking lowest f value
if((iterator.value()->getGcost() + iterator.value()->getHcost()) < (parent->getGcost() + parent->getHcost())){
parent = iterator.value();
}
}
All this code, if you had an stl container, for instance a map, could be reduced to:
auto parent = std::min_element(iterator.begin(), iterator.end(), [](auto& lhs, auto& rhs)
{ lhs.value()->getGcost() + lhs.value()->getHcost()) < (rhs.value()->getGcost() + rhs.value()->getHcost() }
Once you have something easier to understand you can play around with different containers, for instance it might be faster to hold a sorted vector in this case.
)
Your code does not present any obvious problems per se, often performance gains are not conquered by optimizing little loops, it's more on how you code is organized. For instance I see that you have a lot of indirections, those cost a lot in cache misses. Or if you have to always find the minimum element, you could cache it in another structure and you would have it at a constant time, all the time.