Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-30 Thread Abdelrazak Younes
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 06:50:25PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 08:59:19AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of

Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-30 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 06:50:25PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > >On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 08:59:19AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > >>Andre Poenitz wrote: > >>>I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release > >>>build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of total t

Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-30 Thread Abdelrazak Younes
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 08:59:19AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of total time. Not exactly much, but a dozen of such trivial changes will show... Couldn't

Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-30 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 08:59:19AM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > >I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release > >build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of total time. Not exactly much, but a dozen of > >such trivial changes will show... > > Couldn't we just re

Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-30 Thread Abdelrazak Younes
Andre Poenitz wrote: I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of total time. Not exactly much, but a dozen of such trivial changes will show... Couldn't we just remove clone() and implement a copy operator instead? The instantiation will happ

Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-29 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 08:25:15PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > >On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 06:57:47PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > > > >>Andre Poenitz wrote: > >> > >>>I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release > >>>build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of to

Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-29 Thread Richard Heck
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 06:57:47PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of total time. Not exactly much, but a dozen of such trivial changes will show...

Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-29 Thread John Levon
On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 12:51:29AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: > I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release > build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of total time. Not exactly much, but a dozen of > such trivial changes will show... Your rationale is pretty compelling but this should

Re: Acting on 'Things we do wrong. Part III.'

2007-08-29 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 06:57:47PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > >I am tempted to commit the attached patch. Shaves ~22s off a release > >build, i.e. roughly 1.2% of total time. Not exactly much, but a dozen of > >such trivial changes will show... > > Do we know why auto_pt

Things we do wrong. Part III.

2007-08-29 Thread Andre Poenitz
Bad news from the Ivory Tower, part III. --- snip --- #!/bin/bash n=100 # number of classes m=1000 # number of cycles cc=/usr/bin/g++ function useit() { time for i in $s ; do $cc -c $i.cpp ; done echo ".cpp: `cat