public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "ott at fb dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/60976] Compilation with G++ 4.9.0 is 2-3 times slower than with 4.8.2
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 22:42:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-60976-4-JFUobx0muV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-60976-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=60976

--- Comment #22 from Giuseppe Ottaviano <ott at fb dot com> ---
>> The regression might have been already solved in r225244, which uses
>> yet another SFINAE pattern without extra template arguments, which I
>> believe are the cause of the regression. However I haven't tested it
>> yet.


> That would be nice to know, because I now use that kind of
> void_t-style constraint in a few places, and plan to use it more
> widely. My measurements do show that using void_t-style constraints
> result in small but measurable reductions in compile time and memory
> use.
> Oh, I looked at the wrong bit of r225244, it's using SFINAE in a
> trailing-return-type that matters here, not the __detected_or_t_
> changes.

Yes I referred to the trailing return type. Unfortunately it's not trivial to
test it with our code because alloc_traits.h is not anymore a drop-in
replacement. Maybe the test code included in this bug is enough? Is r225244
already included in a GCC release?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-10-19 22:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-04-26 15:36 [Bug c++/60976] New: " astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-26 15:37 ` [Bug c++/60976] " astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-26 15:38 ` astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-26 15:38 ` astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-28 22:56 ` astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-28 22:56 ` astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-28 22:57 ` astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-28 22:58 ` astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-28 22:58 ` astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-28 22:59 ` astellar at ro dot ru
2014-04-29  7:58 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-08  7:00 ` rene.koecher@wincor-nixdorf.com
2015-04-08  8:42 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-08  9:02 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-09  7:16 ` rene.koecher@wincor-nixdorf.com
2015-04-09  9:07 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-09  9:10 ` rene.koecher@wincor-nixdorf.com
2015-04-09  9:12 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-04-09  9:47 ` trippels at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-19 19:21 ` ott at fb dot com
2015-10-19 20:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-19 21:25 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-19 22:42 ` ott at fb dot com [this message]
2015-10-20  0:05 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-21  3:32 ` ott at fb dot com
2015-10-21 19:33 ` ott at fb dot com
2015-10-21 20:27 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-10-22  6:35 ` rene.koecher@wincor-nixdorf.com
2015-10-22  7:12 ` ott at fb dot com
2015-10-25  2:56 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-60976-4-JFUobx0muV@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).