[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Illegal C++
From: |
Erik Sandberg |
Subject: |
Re: Illegal C++ |
Date: |
Tue, 11 Oct 2005 23:38:40 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.8.1 |
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 18.48, Nicolas Sceaux wrote:
> Erik Sandberg <address@hidden> writes:
> > To me, those property lists look like major bottlenecks (though I
> > haven't done any real profiling). Especially the grob property alists:
> > While I was debugging some time ago, I saw that
> > Grob::internal_set_property was called over 1000 times in a trivial
> > score.
BTW, I did a typo. The often-called function was Grob::internal_get_property,
not .._set_property.
> But what time a call to Grob::internal_set_property takes on an alist
> compared to eg a guile hash table? I don't know of guile's hashtables
> and alists, but in Common Lisp, alists are said to be more efficient
> that hashtables for small tables[1]. So there are cases where alist is
> really a sound choice of table structure. (I don't know how many
> properties grobs typically have).
Then it could be sensible to use a 'resizable associative array'
datastructure, which implements itself as an alist when it's small, and as a
resizable hash table for larger sizes.
--
Erik
- Re: Illegal C++, (continued)
- Re: Illegal C++, Paul Scott, 2005/10/07
- Re: Illegal C++, Nicolas Sceaux, 2005/10/07
- Re: Illegal C++, Wiz Aus, 2005/10/10
- Re: Illegal C++, Nicolas Sceaux, 2005/10/07
- Re: Illegal C++, Wiz Aus, 2005/10/10
- Re: Illegal C++, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2005/10/10
- Re: Illegal C++, Erik Sandberg, 2005/10/11
- Re: Illegal C++, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2005/10/11
- Re: Illegal C++, Hans Aberg, 2005/10/11
- Re: Illegal C++, Nicolas Sceaux, 2005/10/11
- Re: Illegal C++,
Erik Sandberg <=