Re: g++ and library optimisations

[Dave Steffen]

pemo <peet.morris@gmail.com> writes:

> On May 13, 4:34 pm, Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov-...@charter.net>
[...]
> 
> Could you clarify it's neither a .h/.cpp?  The source code behind the
> vector template has to be compiled, and thus found.  Intuitively, I
> would expect this be be in some include path, i.e., as vector is
> included in her source, the template boiler plate has also to be
> 'included' somehow.  This seems *not* to be the case however, so I'm
> curious as to how the code 'arrives' for compilation.

  The code is there, almost certainly in a file called "vector" (no .h
  or .cpp suffix).  That file almost certainly #includes some others
  that you'll want to look at.  But again, it's not compiled into a
  library, because templates don't work that way.

> Ok, but can you say whether after doing this [away from her machine at
> the mo] whether gprof requires some explicit input, e.g. gprof a.out?

  To use gprof, compile with the right flags (-pg IIRC) and just run
  the thing.  It produces an output file, which you then feed to the
  gprof program.  Further instructions can be found on line.

  A further note: gprof output isn't particularly easy to work with,
  especially in C++ code.  VTune is probably more useful.  Also, for
  Linux systems, check out Valgrind (specifically the callgrind and
  cachegrind tools) and KCacheGrind, a KDE app that IMHO puts VTune to
  shame.

-- 
Dave Steffen, Ph.D.                Disobey this command!
Software Engineer IV                 - Douglas Hofstadter
Numerica Corporation
dg@steffen a@t numerica d@ot us  (remove @'s to email me)