Subject: Re: [boost] [review] The review of Boost.DoubleEnded starts today: September 21 - September 30
From: Thorsten Ottosen (tottosen_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-10-13 17:13:50
Den 03-10-2017 kl. 00:02 skrev Benedek Thaler via Boost:
> Re-run results in very similar results.
> I think the numbers are convincing in favor of devector::unsafe_push_back.
There is not a huge difference between devector and vector. If I take my
test where I try to confuse the branch predictor and alter just 1 flag:
"favor small code" instead of "favor fast code", then I get:
32 bit:
10E3 63.8728 42.2238
10E4 62.2564 40.5588
10E5 62.0731 40.2956
10E6 62.2532 40.2451
10E7 62.3553 43.5931
64 bit:
10E3 29.2422 24.6654
10E4 28.3354 24.246
10E5 28.2262 23.7662
10E6 28.2777 23.8788
10E7 28.3777 23.8641
I think that is a good example of how the compiler can play tricks on
you. And this is major reason we should always strive after providing
abstractions with zero overhead.
kind regards
Thorsten