This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ 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: AVL vs Red-Black tree

From: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
To: "Daniel K. O." <danielosmari at gmail dot com>
Cc: libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 18:02:26 +0100
Subject: Re: AVL vs Red-Black tree
References: <b8d9e17f0702071310ie9d9ae3tfdadacdeef348b77@mail.gmail.com> <45D45110.3020102@redhat.com> <b8d9e17f0702150642g56b10a41o722c93fff9c1223c@mail.gmail.com>

Sure, I'm trying it right now. Is it possible to build just libstdc++?
I'm not being successful at it, so I'll either try to build both gcc
and g++, or simply reuse the performance testsuite code in my tests.

No, you'll have to build all of gcc. To simplify things, you can build just the c/c++ bits by configuring with the added flag "--enable-languages=c,c++"

Here is some helpful documentation:
http://gcc.gnu.org/install
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/17_intro/contribute.html

BTW: the performance difference may be also related to a less
optimized implementation. Not that I spent any time in the AVL code
other than for correctness and removing duplicated code.

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

-benjamin

References:
- AVL vs Red-Black tree
  - From: Daniel K. O.
- Re: AVL vs Red-Black tree
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- Re: AVL vs Red-Black tree
  - From: Daniel K. O.

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