sammccall added a comment. In D130337#3671159 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337#3671159>, @sammccall wrote:
> FWIW, as-is with no caching, this is a ~2% slowdown on my machine (5.82 -> > 5.72 MB/s on SemaCodeComplete.cpp). > Whereas D130150 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130150> using the grammar is a a > 7% speedup (5.82 -> 6.22), so roughly an 9% performance difference between > the approaches. > My guess is we'll get some but not all of this back through caching, as > hashing isn't free and we'll increase the size of our working set. And indeed, I see about 6.0MB/s with a simple llvm::DenseMap<ForestNode*, bool>, so I expect we can get ~half the performance back. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D130337 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
