[cfe-commits] [Patch] -Wduplicate-enum which fixes PR6343

[Ted Kremenek]

On Aug 28, 2012, at 7:23 PM, Richard Trieu <rtrieu at google.com> wrote:

> If I read these numbers correctly, the hash table algorithm (with O(n) performance) takes about 1.6-2% percent more than the control for runs 1-3, and hardly anything noticeable for the clang code base.  Were runs 1-3 used in your earlier measurements,
> Yes, these are the same runs I have been using.  I earlier did some more runs with smaller files, but the improvements to this warning made the differences too small to detect, so they were dropped.
>  
> where the sorting-based approach took about ~4% longer (or is that not the correct number)?
> That is correct.  The fastest sorting-based reached 4% difference.

Ok, sounds great.  The patch looks fantastic to me now, and the performance is good.  I'd be happy to see this go in.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20120829/852b487c/attachment.html>