This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Varray memory consumption strikes back


On Thu, 2004-09-16 at 16:03, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> Using obstacks for these is obviously cheaper than varrays so it might
> be nice incremental step.  What I was thinking of is to simply wrap
> obstack with something like OBSTACK_PUSH_TREE / OBSTACK_POP_TREE so the
> api is more symetric to what varrays has that I think is much more
> readable.
I'm not 100% convinced that obstacks are cheaper than what we're
doing.  But there's a way to be 100% sure, try them.  I've tried
to decipher their behavior to determine if they could be efficiently
used for similar tasks, but frankly got lost in the code.


> In the case you like this idea, I can simply do that once you are
> finished with the current thread of removing nested arrays.
You can certainly try it and see what results you get.  I'd be
most interested in the compile time behavior as well as memory
utilization. 

jeff


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]