klimek added a comment. In D80202#2046321 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80202#2046321>, @njames93 wrote:
> In D80202#2046266 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D80202#2046266>, @klimek wrote: > > > Given the extra complexity I'd like to see that it matters - bound nodes > > tend to be small. > > > I put that in the description, but this is where i need help. whats the best > way to benchmark the matchers? > Also, do you know how it was benchmarked when `MaxMemoizationEntries` was > decided upon? > There was also comments about some making some micro benchmarks but I don't > think that was acted upon. I do remember benchmarking it when I wrote it, but that was 10 years ago :) I mainly did benchmarks on large ASTs, trying various matchers. Today we can benchmark for example whether running clang-tidy on all of LLVM makes a difference. Micro-BMs would be nice to add, but are somewhat hard to get right. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D80202/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D80202 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits