https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109695
--- Comment #30 from Aldy Hernandez <aldyh at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #29) > Comment on attachment 55031 [details] > WIP patch for a dynamic int_range<> > > What I meant is that by using a auto_vec could avoid reimplementing larger > chunks of vec.h/vec.cc for this. > Resizing by adding 10 more ranges can have higher compile time cost than > what vec.cc (calculate_allocation_1) does - doubles the size each time for > smaller sizes and and multiplying previous by 3 / 2 for larger ones. Hmmm, that may require a lot more work reshuffling how irange is implemented internally. I'll take a peek, but I can't afford to spend another week on this ;-). Also, adding 10 or multiplying by 2, or even adding 5 IIRC, didn't make much of a difference in our benchmarks.