aaron.ballman added inline comments.
================
Comment at: include/clang/AST/TypeLoc.h:513
struct BuiltinLocInfo {
- SourceLocation BuiltinLoc;
+ SourceRange BuiltinRange;
};
----------------
malcolm.parsons wrote:
> aaron.ballman wrote:
> > malcolm.parsons wrote:
> > > aaron.ballman wrote:
> > > > Since this doubles the size of the type loc for builtin types, do you
> > > > happen to have any data on what practical impact this has on RAM usage,
> > > > say for bootstrapping LLVM (or compiling any large source base,
> > > > really)? Hopefully it's not a lot, but it would be nice to know if it's
> > > > a .1%, 1%, 10%, etc increase in usage (or does the change get lost in
> > > > the noise).
> > > I don't have any data.
> > > I'm not sure how to collect that data.
> > It's likely platform dependent, but I was thinking something as simple as
> > looking at peak RAM usage between two different builds of the compiler.
> > Something like `top` would probably work if you're on Linux (unless someone
> > knows of a better way, I'm not strong on Linux).
> Before:
> /usr/bin/time clang++ ... -c llvm/tools/clang/lib/AST/ExprConstant.cpp
> 5.56user 0.13system 0:05.91elapsed 96%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
> 256820maxresident)k
>
> After:
> /usr/bin/time clang++ ... -c llvm/tools/clang/lib/AST/ExprConstant.cpp
> 5.67user 0.12system 0:05.98elapsed 97%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
> 256940maxresident)k
>
> ((256940 - 256820) / 256820) * 100 = 0.05%
Thank you for this -- is there a bigger delta for compilation of LLVM as a
whole? ExprConstant.cpp is an interesting case, but not really representative
of the project as a whole (for instance, there's not a lot of template
metaprogramming in ExprConstant.cpp).
https://reviews.llvm.org/D25363
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
