Fwd: [llvm-dev] Skipping construction/destruction of stack allocated objects

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd: [llvm-dev] Skipping construction/destruction of stack allocated objects

David Blaikie via cfe-dev
Forwarding to cfe-dev as per Chandler's suggestion.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Eli Friedman <[hidden email]>
Date: Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Skipping construction/destruction of stack allocated objects
To: Alexandre Isoard <[hidden email]>, llvm-dev <[hidden email]>


On 1/15/2019 6:09 PM, Alexandre Isoard via llvm-dev wrote:
> Hello,
>
> For performance reasons, I would like to provide a way to skip
> construction/destruction of objects that are stack allocated.
> Typically, C-style arrays of std::complex create an initialization
> loops that is almost always unnecessary.
>
> I am thinking of providing an __attribute__((uninitialized)) that can
> be applied to an object declaration:
>
> {
>     std::complex<float> foo[64][64] __attribute__((uninitialized));
>     // does not need to generate a zeroinitializer loop here
>     somefunction(foo);
>     // does not need to generate a destructor loop here
> (std::complex<float> don't have one anyway)
> }
>
> Formally speaking, we won't call constructors/destructors on those
> objects anymore. We would provide "uninitialized" memory in the same
> meaning as malloc/free.
>
> Do you see this as a good idea? Do we already have a better way of
> achieving this?

The standard way to allocate uninitialized storage in C++ is
std::aligned_storage.  The proposed extension doesn't really seem like
an improvement over that.

-Eli

--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project



--
Alexandre Isoard

_______________________________________________
cfe-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev