[cfe-commits] r84323 - /cfe/trunk/lib/Analysis/RegionStore.cpp

[Zhongxing Xu]

2009/10/18 Ted Kremenek <kremenek at apple.com>:
> Hi Zhongxing,
>
> I actually wasn't criticizing the change of using a SmallSet instead of a
> DenseMap; I was just wondering if you had a specific reason for making the
> change.
>
> The best answer to the question of which one is better is to just measure
> it.  We should try implementing RegionStoreManager::RemoveDeadBindings()
> with both a SmallSet and a DenseMap on some realistic benchmarks and see
> which one performs better.
>
> On Oct 17, 2009, at 8:00 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote:
>
>> 2009/10/18 Ted Kremenek <kremenek at apple.com>:
>>>
>>> Zhongxing,
>>>
>>> Is there a reason you changed 'IntermediateVisited' from a DenseSet to a
>>> SmallSet?  Did you see a performance difference?  I would expect DenseSet
>>> to
>>> be much faster if we scan many regions.
>>>
>>
>> I originally thought there are not many regions to be scanned for a
>> single function. But I didn't make a test. I'll change it to dense
>> set.
>>
>> BTW, how much regions should we use dense set or small set?
>
>

Ah yes.