jtamate added a comment.
In D11487#230755 <https://phabricator.kde.org/D11487#230755>, @mwolff wrote: > yes, definitely don't roll your own lower_bound - use the STL provided one. Are you really compiling in release mode while measuring this? Also, I can only repeat myself in saying that you shouldn't use callgrind for performance measurements anymore, perf/hotspot should give you a much better view of where the CPU cycles are spent. One of the thinks I like about using callgrind, well, kcachegrind, is that I have the tree of calls to one method, that I don't have in perf report. As I said, I've been unable to compile hotspot yet, because I don't have the KF5 devel libraries installed from the distro, and I do not know how to specify an alternative directory in hotspsot cmake. I'll try again with std::lower_bound, I'll take a look at folding, but I was unable to make it work last time. There is a big difference between lower_bound and this implementation: lower_bound does a < checking, while this does a <=. REPOSITORY R39 KTextEditor REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D11487 To: jtamate, #frameworks, #kate Cc: mwolff, cullmann, michaelh, kevinapavew, ngraham, demsking, sars, dhaumann
