Memory optimization #436
Closed
Memory optimization #436
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
hjanetzek
force-pushed
the
memory-optimization
branch
2 times, most recently
from
5ca8564
to
cc85340
Compare
- simplify memory management
a Node is valid when its shared_memory_holder is not null
- unnecessary level of indirection
hjanetzek
force-pushed
the
memory-optimization
branch
from
cc85340
to
e5f5700
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi!
I've started looking into optimizing yaml-cpp. I can split this PR up if you interested only in parts of it.
It seems
node_refwas superfluous, delegating all calls to node_data.shared_ptr is heavy. We don't need atomic ref counting nor weak_ptr. This adds a simple intrusive
ref_countedbase used bynode_data,memoryandmemory_holder.ref_holdermanagesref_countedobjects.No need for
memoryusing a map to hold nodes. Memory can be merged by just concatenating the node items.Node does not need to have an
m_isValidmember: It is implicitly valid if it has a memory_holder.If any of these changes are stupid - please let me know :)