This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@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]

Re: string pools, final version (committed)

To: zackw at Stanford dot EDU
Subject: Re: string pools, final version (committed)
From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 14:14:09 -0800
Cc: neilb at earthling dot net, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <20001116220455.P18114@wolery.stanford.edu><20001117190628.A25620@daikokuya.demon.co.uk><20001117194124.X18114@wolery.stanford.edu>

>>>>> "Zack" == Zack Weinberg <zackw@Stanford.EDU> writes:

    Zack> affiliated data pointer.  Now what do you do?  Giving both
    Zack> of them their own static slots is not an option; now you've
    Zack> doubled the cost for all hash table entries, and for all
    Zack> front ends whether or not they need it.

The CPP hash table could then not contain the strings, just
indices/pointers to them.  You still have two different hash tables --
but only one set of strings.

--
Mark Mitchell                   mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC               http://www.codesourcery.com

Follow-Ups:
- Re: string pools, final version (committed)
  - From: Zack Weinberg

References:
- string pools, final version (committed)
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: string pools, final version (committed)
  - From: Neil Booth
- Re: string pools, final version (committed)
  - From: Zack Weinberg

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