From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
To: Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz>,
Aldy Hernandez <aldyh@redhat.com>, Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>,
Andrew MacLeod <amacleod@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: std:vec for classes with constructor?
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2020 06:16:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mptlfis1hh9.fsf@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <83ac1879-ce77-004c-3934-dddd7b9e22c6@redhat.com> (Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches's message of "Wed, 5 Aug 2020 21:07:52 -0400")
Andrew MacLeod via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> On 8/5/20 12:54 PM, Richard Biener via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> On August 5, 2020 5:09:19 PM GMT+02:00, Martin Jambor <mjambor@suse.cz> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 31 2020, Aldy Hernandez via Gcc-patches wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> * ipa-cp changes from vec<value_range> to std::vec<value_range>.
>>>>
>>>> We are using std::vec to ensure constructors are run, which they
>>> aren't
>>>> in our internal vec<> implementation. Although we usually steer away
>>>> from using std::vec because of interactions with our GC system,
>>>> ipcp_param_lattices is only live within the pass and allocated with
>>> calloc.
>>> Ummm... I did not object but I will save the URL of this message in the
>>> archive so that I can waive it in front of anyone complaining why I
>>> don't use our internal vec's in IPA data structures.
>>>
>>> But it actually raises a broader question: was this supposed to be an
>>> exception, allowed only not to complicate the irange patch further, or
>>> will this be generally accepted thing to do when someone wants to have
>>> a
>>> vector of constructed items?
>> It's definitely not what we want. You have to find another solution to this problem.
>>
>> Richard.
>>
>
> Why isn't it what we want?
>
> This is a small vector local to the pass so it doesn't interfere with
> our PITA GTY.
> The class is pretty straightforward, but we do need a constructor to
> initialize the pointer and the max-size field. There is no allocation
> done per element, so a small number of elements have a couple of fields
> initialized per element. We'd have to loop to do that anyway.
>
> GCC's vec<> does not provide he ability to run a constructor, std::vec
> does.
I realise you weren't claiming otherwise, but: that could be fixed :-)
> I quizzed some libstdc++ folks, and there has been a lot of
> optimizations done on std::vec over the last few years,.. They think its
> pretty good now, and we were encouraged to use it.
>
> We can visit the question tho... What is the rationale for not using
> std::vec in the compiler? We currently use std::swap, std:pair,
> std::map, std::sort, and a few others.
> is there some aspect of using std::vec I am not aware of that makes it
> something we need to avoid?
One reason to prefer vec<> for general interfaces is that it
works with auto_vec<…, N>, making it possible to pre-allocate a
reasonably-sized buffer on the stack without needing a round-trip
through the allocators.
FWIW, that isn't simply a GCC thing. LLVM (which is obviously much
more C++-intensive than GCC) still makes heavy use of SmallVector for
automatic variables. And the reason we have things like memory_block.h
is that malloc did used to show up high in profiles.
(FWIW, I'm not saying that's an argument in favour of avoiding
std::vector completely. It's just a reason why it might not always
be the right choice.)
Thanks,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-06 5:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-31 21:44 [patch] multi-range implementation for value_range (irange) Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-05 14:27 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2020-08-05 15:45 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-05 22:43 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2020-08-06 4:00 ` Richard Sandiford
2020-08-10 3:42 ` Martin Liška
2020-08-10 7:44 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-10 10:22 ` Gerald Pfeifer
2020-08-10 10:30 ` Martin Liška
2020-08-10 11:03 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-05 15:09 ` std:vec for classes with constructor? (Was: Re: [patch] multi-range implementation for value_range (irange)) Martin Jambor
2020-08-05 15:41 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-05 16:55 ` Richard Biener
2020-08-24 21:53 ` Jeff Law
2020-08-24 22:03 ` Andrew MacLeod
2020-08-05 16:54 ` Richard Biener
2020-08-06 1:07 ` Andrew MacLeod
2020-08-06 5:16 ` Richard Sandiford [this message]
2020-08-06 10:19 ` std:vec for classes with constructor? Jonathan Wakely
2020-08-06 10:31 ` Richard Biener
2020-08-06 10:48 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-08-06 14:17 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-06 14:35 ` Richard Biener
2020-08-06 14:59 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-06 16:30 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-08-06 17:58 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-06 19:24 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-08-07 6:48 ` Richard Biener
2020-08-07 7:57 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-08-07 8:22 ` Richard Biener
2020-08-07 8:34 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-08-07 8:54 ` Richard Biener
2020-08-07 8:55 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-07 9:17 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-08-07 18:04 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-07 18:33 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-10 12:57 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-10 13:05 ` Aldy Hernandez
2020-08-10 18:03 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-10 13:51 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-10 16:58 ` Richard Biener
2020-08-10 17:18 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-13 11:38 ` r11-2663 causes static_assert failure (was: Re: std:vec for classes with constructor?) Tobias Burnus
2020-08-13 11:52 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-13 12:06 ` r11-2663 causes static_assert failure Tobias Burnus
2020-08-13 12:25 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-13 12:40 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-13 12:46 ` Iain Sandoe
2020-08-13 12:55 ` Iain Sandoe
2020-08-13 13:04 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-13 13:00 ` Jakub Jelinek
2020-08-06 6:57 ` std:vec for classes with constructor? (Was: Re: [patch] multi-range implementation for value_range (irange)) Richard Biener
2020-08-06 10:23 ` Jonathan Wakely
2020-08-06 11:03 ` Aldy Hernandez
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=mptlfis1hh9.fsf@arm.com \
--to=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=aldyh@redhat.com \
--cc=amacleod@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jwakely@redhat.com \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=mjambor@suse.cz \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
/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).