[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043
From: |
jonas . hahnfeld |
Subject: |
Re: Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043 by address@hidden) |
Date: |
Sat, 11 Apr 2020 04:05:28 -0700 |
On 2020/04/11 05:37:39, hanwenn wrote:
> > In addition, I don't think that it is used to a degree where it
would
> significantly affect LilyPond's performance.
>
> It is not yet.
>
> My plan is to plugin this into Grob and Prob and see if there is a
measurable
> speed improvement. If there is none, it's likely that your double
indexing
> scheme will also not bring much.
I'd strongly suggest we have numbers first before introducing ~300 lines
for a custom hash implementation. It's good to have the implementation
available early (I haven't looked at it yet), but I think it should only
be merged with strong evidence that it's worth it.
https://codereview.appspot.com/559790043/
- Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/04/10
- Re: Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/04/11
- Re: Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043 by address@hidden),
jonas . hahnfeld <=
- Re: Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/04/11
- Re: Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043 by address@hidden), dak, 2020/04/11
- Re: Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043 by address@hidden), hanwenn, 2020/04/12
- Re: Reimplement Scheme_hash_table using linear probing. (issue 559790043 by address@hidden), jonas . hahnfeld, 2020/04/14