vsk added a comment. In D55658#1332249 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55658#1332249>, @riccibruno wrote:
> In D55658#1332240 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D55658#1332240>, @vsk wrote: > > > Thanks for working on this :). It’d be interesting to see some pre/post > > patch compile time numbers on CTMark. > > > > Naive/strawman alternative here, but: what’s the impact on peak RSS and > > compile time of just storing an ASTContext pointer in Decl/DeclContext? If > > it’s not out of the question to grow Decl etc. and it gives a nice speed > > up, that might be a simpler approach. > > > I will try to get some numbers from CTMark. > > I don't think that storing a ref/pointer to the `ASTContext` in each > `DeclContext` (no point in storing it in `Decl`) is a great idea. > I experimented with this and the speedup from avoiding the lookup of the > `ASTContext` is almost completely offset by > the slowdown from the increased memory usage. Good to know, thanks for trying it out! Repository: rC Clang CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D55658/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D55658 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
