Re: [cxx-conversion] New Hash Table (issue6244048)

[Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>]

On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 02:42:39PM -0700, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> On 5/24/12, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 09:43:42AM -0700, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> > > Add a type-safe hash table, typed_htab.  Uses of this table
> > > replace uses of libiberty's htab_t.  The benefits include less
> > > boiler-plate code, full type safety, and improved performance.
> >
> > You haven't looked at the most important problem of that approach
> > - code bloat.
> 
> Are you claiming that the size of the binary is more important than
> run-time performance, type safety, and source code size?

Runtime performance goes in hand with the size of the binary, at least
size of frequently used code.  By converting just a couple of hash tables
you can't really measure it, you'd need to convert a significant number of
them, then you can see what effect it has on runtime performance.
As said earlier, GCC has lots of hash tables, and many of them are used
in performance critical code, by increasing the I-cache footprint of
that performance criticial code there is risk of reducing performance.
The common C++ programming techniques often lead to significant code bloat
which really shouldn't be ignored.

	Jakub