http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50481
Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||de
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #30 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-09-22
13:39:22 UTC ---
Sorry, thank you for creating the feature-request.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-30
23:25:25 UTC ---
Created attachment 25143
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25143
bits/stl_vector.h patch
moved operator== and operator inside class
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #15 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-30
23:30:00 UTC ---
Created attachment 25144
-- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=25144
b
More efficient (non representative benchmark!) implementation
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #16 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-30
23:30:36 UTC ---
Added basic patch…
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #18 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-30
23:56:38 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #17)
(In reply to comment #14)
moved operator== and operator inside class, because I want to overload them
huh, why
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #21 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-31
00:30:58 UTC ---
It would indeed be nice to have such a builtin function (8, 16, 32, 64 bit
reversing), currently there is none in gcc, only bytewise reversing iirc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #23 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-31
00:34:28 UTC ---
@Paolo
Okay, I am sometimes overcautious with function-templates, because I often had
a lot of errors because of partial specialisation when
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #24 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-31
00:39:57 UTC ---
@Andrew
Nope:
1001 0001 (lexicographically)
1001 0001 (as little-endian)
0110 1110 (as little-endian)
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #2 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-23
13:50:09 UTC ---
Well, it made my specific application very slow, when using vectorbool as
key_type for (ordered) map. What kind of numbers would be usefull? I think
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-23
18:21:36 UTC ---
In libc++ it is the same, specialised hash, but no specialised operator.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #5 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-23
18:26:48 UTC ---
In libc++ it seems to be the same, specialised hashing, but no specialised
comparison. Ok, I can write a patch and test if it is actually faster (it
should
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #6 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-23
18:29:19 UTC ---
Ok, I can write a patch and test if it is actually faster (it
should). Is there any coding-guide line (style, variables etc.)?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #8 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-23
19:04:25 UTC ---
For my application I should simply use an unordered_map and all the overhead
has gone. :D But operator simply should not be that slow.
“I haven't thought
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #9 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-23
19:10:06 UTC ---
Hmm, reversing really is not that nice.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #10 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-23
19:15:20 UTC ---
There seem to be a lot of tricks to achieve that:
http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#ReverseByteWith64BitsDiv
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50160
--- Comment #12 from Jonathan Schmidt-Dominé de...@the-user.org 2011-08-23
19:31:37 UTC ---
“Any particular reason?”
No particular one, but a small specialisation would be nicer than changing
everything or doing bitfiddling.
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
ReportedBy: de...@the-user.org
Hi!
Comparison (operator) on vectorbool seems to be extremely slow, because it
uses a generic implementation, i.e. bitwise iteration. It should be specialised
and use
18 matches
Mail list logo
