From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8914 invoked by alias); 22 Jan 2004 13:12:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8813 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2004 13:12:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO smtp3.libero.it) (193.70.192.127) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Jan 2004 13:12:38 -0000 Received: from bagio (151.41.185.98) by smtp3.libero.it (7.0.020-DD01) id 3F6F04A6022C81E0; Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:12:37 +0100 Message-ID: <0b3901c3e0e9$676eeaf0$62b92997@bagio> From: "Giovanni Bajo" To: "Richard Guenther" , Cc: "Mark Mitchell" , "Jan Hubicka" References: Subject: Re: cache uses_template_parms in tree node? Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:24:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2004-01/txt/msg01750.txt.bz2 Richard Guenther wrote: > To address the for_each_template_parm() performance problem, would it > be possible to cache the outcome of uses_template_parms() in the tree > node? Or would this caching somehow be invalidated later? > Just before I start digging into gcc tree's and its wonders :/ To me, the right solution is to get rid of uses_template_parms() altogether. We can check for type/value dependness instead (we already have functions for that, and we even cache the outcome in the tree as you are suggesting), so it's just a matter of removing the old code. I asked Honza to provide me with some numbers about which calls to uses_template_parms are the ones most important from a compile-time point of view. I'm willing to look into this when I get the numbers. Giovanni Bajo