range-based loops and const qualifications in net.cpp #10888

Plus a use of std::copy() instead of manual copying.

(The loop on line 117 is already done in #10493).

Concept ACK (strong ACK! :-))

How about "improving" those FindNode functions to something like this,

auto iter = std::find_if(vNodes.begin(), vNodes.end(), [&](CNode *node) {
    return node->GetAddrName() == addrName;
});

return iter == vNodes.end() ? NULL : *iter;

I believe C++11 allows that

@corebob I guess it is a matter of taste, but personally I find the current range-based for loop form more straightforward and easier to read:

     for (CNode* pnode : vNodes) {
          if (pnode->GetAddrName() == addrName) {
              return pnode;
          }
      }
      return NULL;

@practicalswift I pretty much agree. I think pro arguments could be made for getting rid of a raw loop, and getting rid of an extra exit point. Though probably not worth it in this case.

I am usually in favor of using algorithm, as explicit names (find_if) and lambdas are more descriptive than loops etc., but in this case, I don't like the return value conversion, so it indeed looks more complicated than before. Too bad.

Rebased.

Can someone please retrigger CI?

utACK a9144d535122a4d08348e477315b5a94368e6dfc

Travis passed after restart.

utACK a9144d535.

Since this is refactoring only you also might want to use clang format on the changed lines. (See the developer notes for a one-liner to fixup the formatting)

@MarcoFalke I also applied clang-format. Nice tool. Maybe it should go into the CI for all future changes ;)

re-utACK 05cae8a

Can this be merged?