On 06/20/2016 12:22 PM, tbsaunde+...@tbsaunde.org wrote:
In theory I would expect if anything this helps performance since it isn't necessary to malloc every time a node is added, however the data is less clear.
Well, we have alloc pools for these lists, so a malloc is not needed for every node.
fold const O2 new real 0m5.034s user 0m3.408s sys 0m0.364s fold const O2 old real 0m4.012s user 0m3.420s sys 0m0.340s
So that's a second more in real time - was the machine very busy at the time you ran these tests so that these aren't meaningful, or is there a need to investigate this?
So a couple got about .3s slower, and others got about .1 faster, I'm not really sure but inclined to say any change is too small to easily measure. bootstrapped + regtested patches individually on x86_64-linux-gnu, ok?
Modulo the question about compile times I think patches 1-4 are ok, In 5 and 6 I see explicit for loops instead of FOR_EACH macros; I'm curious as to the reason.
Bernd