re: Large, modular C++ application performance ...

[michael meeks <michael dot meeks at novell dot com>]

Hi Dan,

On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 11:19 -0400, dank@kegel.com wrote:
> MM wrote in http://go-oo.org/~michael/OOoStartup.pdf:
> "... not one slot was overridden by an implementation
> method external to the implementing library."

	This is really an issue rather orthogonal to that of 'final', what I'm
trying to say (clearly, rather badly) - is that in those 3 libraries
there were 0 instances of virtual functions of a given class implemented
in that DSO, being implemented outside that DSO.[1]

	The significance of this is that - if we can markup classes to generate
internal relocations for their overridden slots, and copy the parent
library's (also internally) relocated version for inherited slots,
(during this proposed idle vtable relocation process). Then we would
avoid needing ~any named relocations at all to construct these vtables.
ie. go from many tens of thousands of the slowest type of relocation, to
none.

	HTH,

		Michael.

[1] - further research AFAIR showed only a handful of these instances
across all OO.o libraries.
-- 
 michael.meeks@novell.com  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot