Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "013436".
Did you mean:
13436
2008 Apr 16
0
[LLVMdev] PATCH: Use size reduction -- wave2
Hi Gabor,
Can you provide performance data for this? I'd
like to know what affect these changes have on
compile time.
Thanks,
Dan
On Apr 15, 2008, at 3:32 PM, Gabor Greif wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> here comes the patch for the second wave of Use class size reduction.
>
> I have included all the machinery that is needed, and it is
> *active*. The User* inside of Use is even
2008 Apr 16
5
[LLVMdev] PATCH: Use size reduction -- wave2
...ving off (unneeded) operand related administrative members from
User.
I hope that this is interesting, but I'd like to ask anybody who is
comfortable with performance testing to help provide some hard
data :-)
Cheers,
Gabor
[1] <http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2008-March/
013436.html>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dan
>
> On Apr 15, 2008, at 3:32 PM, Gabor Greif wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi All,
>
> > here comes the patch for the second wave of Use class size reduction.
>
> > I have included all the machinery that is needed, and it is
>...
2008 Apr 15
6
[LLVMdev] PATCH: Use size reduction -- wave2
Hi All,
here comes the patch for the second wave of Use class size reduction.
I have included all the machinery that is needed, and it is
*active*. The User* inside of Use is even sometimes NULL,
but the algorithm is able to recover it.
If there is a non-null User* present, then I am
asserting that it equals the computed value.
I did not receive feedback for the algorithmic part yet,
so I