[PATCH v2 3/3] libstdc++: Optimize is_fundamental performance by __is_arithmetic built-in
Jonathan Wakely
jwakely@redhat.com
Tue Aug 8 20:18:48 GMT 2023
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 at 07:25, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ <
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I took a benchmark for this.
>
>
> https://github.com/ken-matsui/gcc-benches/blob/main/is_fundamental-disjunction.md#mon-jul-17-105937-pm-pdt-2023
>
> template<typename _Tp>
> struct is_fundamental
> : public std::bool_constant<__is_arithmetic(_Tp)
> || std::is_void<_Tp>::value
> || std::is_null_pointer<_Tp>::value>
> { };
>
> is faster than:
>
> template<typename _Tp>
> struct is_fundamental
> : public std::bool_constant<__is_arithmetic(_Tp)
> || std::disjunction<std::is_void<_Tp>,
> std::is_null_pointer<_Tp>
> >::value>
> { };
>
> Time: -32.2871%
> Peak Memory: -18.5071%
> Total Memory: -20.1991%
>
But what about the fallback implementation of is_fundamental where we don't
have the __is_arithmetic built-in?
- : public __or_<is_arithmetic<_Tp>, is_void<_Tp>,
- is_null_pointer<_Tp>>::type
+ : public __bool_constant<is_arithmetic<_Tp>::value
+ || is_void<_Tp>::value
+ || is_null_pointer<_Tp>::value>
Here the use of __or_ means that for is_fundamental<int> we don't
instantiate is_void<int> and is_null_pointer<int>. Isn't that still
worthwhile?
>
> Sincerely,
> Ken Matsui
>
> On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 9:49 PM Ken Matsui <kmatsui@cs.washington.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 16, 2023 at 5:41 AM François Dumont <frs.dumont@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 15/07/2023 06:55, Ken Matsui via Libstdc++ wrote:
> > > > This patch optimizes the performance of the is_fundamental trait by
> > > > dispatching to the new __is_arithmetic built-in trait.
> > > >
> > > > libstdc++-v3/ChangeLog:
> > > >
> > > > * include/std/type_traits (is_fundamental_v): Use
> __is_arithmetic
> > > > built-in trait.
> > > > (is_fundamental): Likewise. Optimize the original
> implementation.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ken Matsui <kmatsui@gcc.gnu.org>
> > > > ---
> > > > libstdc++-v3/include/std/type_traits | 21 +++++++++++++++++----
> > > > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/type_traits
> b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/type_traits
> > > > index 7ebbe04c77b..cf24de2fcac 100644
> > > > --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/std/type_traits
> > > > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/std/type_traits
> > > > @@ -668,11 +668,21 @@ _GLIBCXX_BEGIN_NAMESPACE_VERSION
> > > > #endif
> > > >
> > > > /// is_fundamental
> > > > +#if __has_builtin(__is_arithmetic)
> > > > + template<typename _Tp>
> > > > + struct is_fundamental
> > > > + : public __bool_constant<__is_arithmetic(_Tp)
> > > > + || is_void<_Tp>::value
> > > > + || is_null_pointer<_Tp>::value>
> > > > + { };
> > >
> > > What about doing this ?
> > >
> > > template<typename _Tp>
> > > struct is_fundamental
> > > : public __bool_constant<__is_arithmetic(_Tp)
> > > || __or_<is_void<_Tp>,
> > > is_null_pointer<_Tp>>::value>
> > > { };
> > >
> > > Based on your benches it seems that builtin __is_arithmetic is much
> better that std::is_arithmetic. But __or_ could still avoid instantiation
> of is_null_pointer.
> > >
> > Let me take a benchmark for this later.
>
>
More information about the Libstdc++
mailing list