On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On May 21, 2014, at 9:19 , Manuel Klimek <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 6:10 PM, Jordan Rose <[email protected]>wrote: > >> You might want to bump up the size of the SmallVector too. Right now >> you're dynamically allocating a SmallVector<T, 1>, and immediately putting >> two things into it. Alternately, you could use a std::vector, which has a >> smaller sizeof itself. >> > > I tried the various combinations, and it didn't make a difference, so I > went for making the code the simplest, which was reusing the ParentVector > typedef. > If we change the ParentVector to a SmallVector<T, 2> we'll also use that > for getParents() which mostly returns a single element. > > > > SmallVector's already too big to fit in registers, so adding another two > words to it won't really hurt any uses on the stack, will it? > So you're proposing to just bump it to 2? I'm happy to do that, but I lack any way to get data that would sway me one way or the other, thus I think it's mostly guesswork (but I trust your guesswork is probably better than mine ;) > > Alternately you could wrap up your PointerUnion in something similar to > TinyPtrVector, but that's probably more complexity than is really necessary > here. > > Jordan > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
