> On Nov 20, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Alexey Proskuryakov <a...@webkit.org> wrote: > > > SmallVector and Vector seem reasonable to me. I think that this is the right > nomenclature - using limited size vectors should be a conscious choice. > > Even SmallVector should probably have a size_t API, so that we could > centralize magnitude checks. What do you think?
Agreed. This avoids any risk of someone computing a size_t quantity and flowing it into the SmallVector API in a way that would result in truncation that SmallVector cannot internally catch. -Filip > > - Alexey > > > 20 нояб. 2014 г., в 11:40, Filip Pizlo <fpi...@apple.com > <mailto:fpi...@apple.com>> написал(а): > >> That looks like a pretty good performance win. >> >> I'd advocate for SmallVector and Vector, then. >> >> -Filip >> >> >>> On Nov 20, 2014, at 11:38 AM, Chris Dumez <cdu...@apple.com >>> <mailto:cdu...@apple.com>> wrote: >>> >>> The corresponding Blink bug did contain some performance data: >>> CrBug#229226 <https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=229226> >>> >>> Kr, >>> -- >>> Chris Dumez - Apple Inc. >>> Cupertino, CA >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Nov 20, 2014, at 11:32 AM, Geoffrey Garen <gga...@apple.com >>>> <mailto:gga...@apple.com>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I wonder what the downsides are to this approach. Footprint of Vector? >>>> >>>> It looks like the original change was motivated by shrinking Vector: >>>> >>>> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97268 >>>> <https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97268> >>>> >>>> Sadly, it didn’t include any data on the observed benefit :(. >>>> >>>> Geoff >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> webkit-dev mailing list >>>> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org <mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org> >>>> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev >>>> <https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev> >>> >> > >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
