Re: For loop benchmarks between Octave versions

[John W. Eaton]

On 06/17/2014 09:29 AM, Julien Bect wrote:
> Le 17/06/2014 02:39, Rik a écrit :
> > I find that this changeset:
> >
> > 12920:5d18231eee00 Extend profiling support to operators.
> >
> > produces a 50% slow down when using the for loop benchmark. Unless we
> > can figure out a lower footprint way to do profiling we might be stuck
> > with this part of the slowdown.
>
> The attached patch significantly improves the situation for me.
>
> On the gui-release branch, the runtime goes from 2.75 seconds to 2.16
> seconds.
>
> Not a 50% improvement, though...

Does declaring is_active "inline" really make a difference?  I'd be 
surprised if that is not always inlined when the compiler is performing 
inlining optimizations.

I don't much like having to manually match up new/delete, so I'd rather 
see that go inside a constructor/destructor pair.  Done properly and 
with inlining, I don't see why it would be inefficient and perhaps we 
could eliminate the BEGIN/END macros?

jwe