Re: [Patch] libstdc++/23425

[chris jefferson <caj at cs dot york dot ac dot uk>]

Paolo Carlini wrote:

>chris jefferson wrote:
>
>  
>
>>In the case where it isn't removed, I find that this loop is slightly
>>faster for deques, and slightly slower for vectors. Depends on what
>>tradeoff should be made really.
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>By the way, in your experiments when isn't the loop removed? In mine,
>for vector things are very nice: all the PODs I tried are fine, PODs +
>simple constructors are also fine.
>
>  
>
Sorry, I meant when the loop isn't removed because _Destroy has to
actually do something, then vector is slightly slower and deque is
slightly faster (of course if that "doing something" isn't
super-trivial, like just maintaining a reference count or something,
then the extra tiny loop overhead gets quickly swamped away).

Chris