On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 7:17 PM zyx <z...@gmx.us> wrote: > On Wed, 2019-01-30 at 17:06 +0100, Michal Sudolsky wrote: > > Actually there is huge chance that modern compiler will optimise this > > only to single call (if are optimisations enabled). And even if not > > there are "heavier" things inside loop so it would be negligible > > performance gain. > > Hi, > I'm not sure what you mean with "modern compiler". I did not have > anything ancient on my mind. > > Yes, of course, there is a chance for the compiler help, but those > begin()/end() can be called million times (generally speaking, > according to my personal experience it can have significant performance > hit).
> It's also nice to have things working consistently (debug builds > can have disabled certain/all optimizations). > Generally debug builds have disabled all optimisations so they can be debugged. With optimisations this can be hard because functions are inlined and removed, variables are removed and many other things so resulting binary code can hardly represent source code and it is hard to debug, then there is hardly much consistency even in code with such hand optimisations. > And yes, no doubt, there are other places which are bigger performance > hit than these. One might start somewhere, right? > > I didn't mean that using the end() call in the mabri's patch is a stop > for the patch inclusion, that's definitely not the case. I only wanted > to say that it would be nice to make things optimized a bit. I'm sorry > if it was not clear from my comment (that's why I used "bonus points"). > > Bye, > zyx > > > > _______________________________________________ > Podofo-users mailing list > Podofo-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/podofo-users >
_______________________________________________ Podofo-users mailing list Podofo-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/podofo-users
