This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: [Patch]: Corrected patch for stl_tree.h to improve performance andmemory usage
- From: "Gawain Bolton" <boltong at nortelnetworks dot com>
- To: libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Cc: Loren James Rittle <rittle at latour dot rsch dot comm dot mot dot com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2003 14:20:08 +0100
- Subject: Re: [Patch]: Corrected patch for stl_tree.h to improve performance andmemory usage
- Organization: Nortel Networks
- References: <200303060055.h260tP53002136@latour.rsch.comm.mot.com>
Loren James Rittle wrote:
> In article <3E667887 dot 6050302 at computer dot org> Gawain Bolton writes:
>
> > Ok, here I go again. Please find attached a patch for stl_tree.h to
> > improve performance and memory usage. This patch differs from the
> > previous one (http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-02/msg00398.html) in
> > that all compile errors have (hopefully) been fixed [...]
> > Once again, all and any feedback appreciated.
>
> Gawain,
>
> Again, sweet work. I think you have nailed all of the performance
> issues raised. If you ever answered the first time I asked in regards
> to your std::list improvements back around Feb 12, I'm sorry I missed
> it. I have the same two issues (which now apply to both the list and
> tree improvements).
>
> First, do you[/Nortel --- where you posted from last month] have an
> assignment for GCC on file with the FSF? Based on the informal
> 10-line rule, your work appears to be beyond a simple bug/performance
> fix. Opinions on this point by other library maintainers?
Hi Loren,
Yes I suggested very similar improvements for std::list on 12th February as
you say (cf. http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2003-02/msg00178.html). I
decided to concentrate on stl_tree.h first because it gives more added value
as it affects std::map, std::multimap, std::set and std::multiset. I will
re-address std::list once the stl_tree.h changes are approved.
To answer your first question, I do not know if Nortel has an assignment for
GCC on file with the FSF. Even worse, I do not know what this is and
wouldn't even know who to ask about such a thing.
I was not aware of the "10-line rule" but I do actually consider the patch
to be a simple performance/memory usage enhancement despite this informal
rule.
Thanks for your feedback,
Gawain
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gawain Bolton | E-mail: boltong at nortelnetworks dot com
UMTS Development |
Nortel Networks | Voice: ESN 579-3763 +33 1.39.44.37.63
Guyancourt, France | FAX: ESN 579-3009 +33 1.39.44.30.09
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------