develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from February 2017

Re: more process_optree

Thread Previous
Dave Mitchell
February 15, 2017 19:31
Re: more process_optree
Message ID:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:17:59AM -0700, Jim Cromie wrote:
> yes, its bigger, but its out-of-band, and the resulting optree is ~20%
> smaller,

If you're into reducing op sizes, you'd be better off initially trying
to eliminate the opslot_next and/or opslot_slab fields from the opslot
struct (which is something I have on my list of things to look at).

Be warned that I am extremely unlikely to recommend the committing into
blead of any patch which unionises op_ppaddr and op_sibling.

> > A problem shared is a problem doubled.
> that one feels hand-picked, or was it just coincidence ?

It's purely random.

If life gives you lemons, you'll probably develop a citric acid allergy.

Thread Previous Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About