This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GDB project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFA 2/4] dwarf2_physname

On Monday 23 November 2009 17:56:10 Keith Seitz wrote:
> On 11/22/2009 11:26 PM, André Pönitz wrote:
> > I am really worried about the performance degradation you expect.
> >
> > How bad will that be?
> If we can define a suitable metric, I would be happy to perform any 
> testing/comparisons necessary.
> > If the deal is "correct but slow" vs "flaky but faster" I surely prefer the
> > "flaky but fast" side. I have encountered quite a few issues with C++ in
> > gdb, so yes, that's not nice. But usually one can work around somehow on
> > the user side. Raw speed on the other hand is nothing the user can improve.
> I'm more of a "correct over speed" guy myself, but your concern is 
> noted. Maintainers will have to weigh this matter when more information 
> about the impact is known.
> Like I said: If anyone can define for me a suitable test(s), I would be 
> happy to do whatever necessary to quantify this.

I am in the same camp in general, too, but in this particular case
the "user experience" is already stretched to a degree that people
start pointing fingers ;-}

I guess it's hard to come up with a benchmark that everybody 
would consider authoritive. I could run a few tests for scenarios
I am interested in, though. Am I right in assuming that I could just
pull one of the archer archer-keiths-* branches? Would that be


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]