Search Results

Search found 45 results on 2 pages for 'inlining'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

• Supressing inlining warning

  - by thetna

  I am getting inling warning such as : warning: inlining failed in call to ‘symbol_Arity’: call is unlikely and code size would grow To get rid of this i changed the makefile adding the -Winline to get rid of this. I don't get any inlining warning. But , i don't know how wise is it to do in respect of performance. Can anybody please suggest me about it?

  Read the article

• c++ Function pointer inlining

  - by wb

  I know I can pass a function pointer as a template parameter and get a call to it inlined but I wondered if any compilers these days can inline an 'obvious' inline-able function like: inline static void Print() { std::cout << "Hello\n"; } .... void (*func)() = Print; func(); Under Visual Studio 2008 its clever enough to get it down to a direct call instruction so it seems a shame it can't take it a step further?

  Read the article

• Run Time Inlining in C#?

  - by vtd-xml-author

  A couple of questions on C# 1. Does C# support runtime inlining? 2. Can a virtual function be inlined?

  Read the article

• Inlining the LaTeX \input Command

  - by reprogrammer

  I'm looking a program to recursively inline all \input{} commands in a LaTeX file. By "recursively", I mean doing the inlining iteratively until no \input{} command remains in the final LaTeX file. I've already come across the flatten package. But, for some reason, my TeXLive distribution doesn't install it. When I execute the command sudo tlmgr show flatten, I get the error message: tlmgr: cannot find flatten. So, I'm looking for alternative tools that are more standard and easier to install.

  Read the article

• Inlining an array of non-default constructible objects in a C++ class

  - by porgarmingduod

  C++ doesn't allow a class containing an array of items that are not default constructible: class Gordian { public: int member; Gordian(int must_have_variable) : member(must_have_variable) {} }; class Knot { Gordian* pointer_array[8]; // Sure, this works. Gordian inlined_array[8]; // Won't compile. Can't be initialized. }; As even beginner C++ users know, the language guarantees that all members are initialized when constructing a class. And it doesn't trust the user to initialize everything in the constructor - one has to provide valid arguments to the constructors of all members before the body of the constructor even starts. Generally, that's a great idea as far as I'm concerned, but I've come across a situation where it would be a lot easier if I could actually have an array of non-default constructible objects. The obvious solution: Have an array of pointers to the objects. This is not optimal in my case, as I am using shared memory. It would force me to do extra allocation from an already contended resource (that is, the shared memory). The entire reason I want to have the array inlined in the object is to reduce the number of allocations. This is a situation where I would be willing to use a hack, even an ugly one, provided it works. One possible hack I am thinking about would be: class Knot { public: struct dummy { char padding[sizeof(Gordian)]; }; dummy inlined_array[8]; Gordian* get(int index) { return reinterpret_cast<Gordian*>(&inlined_array[index]); } Knot() { for (int x = 0; x != 8; x++) { new (get(x)) Gordian(x*x); } } }; Sure, it compiles, but I'm not exactly an experienced C++ programmer. That is, I couldn't possibly trust my hacks less. So, the questions: 1) Does the hack I came up with seem workable? What are the issues? (I'm mainly concerned with C++0x on newer versions of GCC). 2) Is there a better way to inline an array of non-default constructible objects in a class?

  Read the article

• "Inlining" (kind of) functions at runtime in C

  - by fortran

  Hi, I was thinking about a typical problem that is very JIT-able, but hard to approach with raw C. The scenario is setting up a series of function pointers that are going to be "composed" (as in maths function composition) once at runtime and then called lots and lots of times. Doing it the obvious way involves many virtual calls, that are expensive, and if there are enough nested functions to fill the CPU branch prediction table completely, then the performance with drop considerably. In a language like Lisp, I could probably process the code and substitute the "virtual" call by the actual contents of the functions and then call compile to have an optimized version, but that seems very hacky and error prone to do in C, and using C is a requirement for this problem ;-) So, do you know if there's a standard, portable and safe way to achieve this in C? Cheers

  Read the article

• When is a method eligible to be inlined by the CLR?

  - by Ani

  I've observed a lot of "stack-introspective" code in applications, which often implicitly rely on their containing methods not being inlined for their correctness. Such methods commonly involve calls to: MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod Assembly.GetCallingAssembly Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly Now, I find the information surrounding these methods to be very confusing. I've heard that the run-time will not inline a method that calls GetCurrentMethod, but I can't find any documentation to that effect. I've seen posts on StackOverflow on several occasions, such as this one, indicating the CLR does not inline cross-assembly calls, but the GetCallingAssembly documentation strongly indicates otherwise. There's also the much-maligned [MethodImpl(MethodImpOptions.NoInlining)], but I am unsure if the CLR considers this to be a "request" or a "command." Note that I am asking about inlining eligibility from the standpoint of contract, not about when current implementations of the JITter decline to consider methods because of implementation difficulties, or about when the JITter finally ends up choosing to inline an eligible method after assessing the trade-offs. I have read this and this, but they seem to be more focused on the last two points (there are passing mentions of MethodImpOptions.NoInlining and "exotic IL instructions", but these seem to be presented as heuristics rather than as obligations). When is the CLR allowed to inline?

  Read the article

• Make LLVM inline a function from a library

  - by capitrane

  I am trying to make LLVM inline a function from a library. I have LLVM bitcode files (manually generated) that I linked together with llvm-link, I also have a library (written in C) compiled into bitcode by clang and archived with llvm-ar. I manage to link everything together and to execute but i can't manage to get LLVM to inline a function from the library. Any clue about how this should be done?

  Read the article

• CLR 4.0 inlining policy? (maybe bug with MethodImplOptions.NoInlining)

  - by ControlFlow

  I've testing some new CLR 4.0 behavior in method inlining (cross-assembly inlining) and found some strage results: Assembly ClassLib.dll: using System.Diagnostics; using System; using System.Reflection; using System.Security; using System.Runtime.CompilerServices; namespace ClassLib { public static class A { static readonly MethodInfo GetExecuting = typeof(Assembly).GetMethod("GetExecutingAssembly"); public static Assembly Foo(out StackTrace stack) // 13 bytes { // explicit call to GetExecutingAssembly() stack = new StackTrace(); return Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly(); } public static Assembly Bar(out StackTrace stack) // 25 bytes { // reflection call to GetExecutingAssembly() stack = new StackTrace(); return (Assembly) GetExecuting.Invoke(null, null); } public static Assembly Baz(out StackTrace stack) // 9 bytes { stack = new StackTrace(); return null; } public static Assembly Bob(out StackTrace stack) // 13 bytes { // call of non-inlinable method! return SomeSecurityCriticalMethod(out stack); } [SecurityCritical, MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.NoInlining)] static Assembly SomeSecurityCriticalMethod(out StackTrace stack) { stack = new StackTrace(); return Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly(); } } } Assembly ConsoleApp.exe using System; using ClassLib; using System.Diagnostics; class Program { static void Main() { Console.WriteLine("runtime: {0}", Environment.Version); StackTrace stack; Console.WriteLine("Foo: {0}\n{1}", A.Foo(out stack), stack); Console.WriteLine("Bar: {0}\n{1}", A.Bar(out stack), stack); Console.WriteLine("Baz: {0}\n{1}", A.Baz(out stack), stack); Console.WriteLine("Bob: {0}\n{1}", A.Bob(out stack), stack); } } Results: runtime: 4.0.30128.1 Foo: ClassLib, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null at ClassLib.A.Foo(StackTrace& stack) at Program.Main() Bar: ClassLib, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null at ClassLib.A.Bar(StackTrace& stack) at Program.Main() Baz: at Program.Main() Bob: ClassLib, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null at Program.Main() So questions are: Why JIT does not inlined Foo and Bar calls as Baz does? They are lower than 32 bytes of IL and are good candidates for inlining. Why JIT inlined call of Bob and inner call of SomeSecurityCriticalMethod that is marked with the [MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.NoInlining)] attribute? Why GetExecutingAssembly returns a valid assembly when is called by inlined Baz and SomeSecurityCriticalMethod methods? I've expect that it performs the stack walk to detect the executing assembly, but stack will contains only Program.Main() call and no methods of ClassLib assenbly, to ConsoleApp should be returned.

  Read the article

• Can getters and setters be inlined when definition and declaration are seperated in .h and .cpp files?

  - by Nathan

  I have searched and have been unable to verify how the GCC compiler will handle inlining getters and setters when declaration is in .h file and definition is in .cpp file. Most seem to say that GCC can't see across these source file barriers and won't be able to inline these at all, while others disagree. I have looked at the documentation and I can't find the answer there either. Did I miss it? I do realize that inlining is a choice made by the compiler and is not always guaranteed, but assuming optimal situations, is it at least possible?

  Read the article

• Are there any tools that can inline css?

  - by Todd R

  Because some email clients don't properly render external stylesheets (or even styles within the of an html email message), inlining css is a common approach to try to maintain consistent look and feel between a website and emails. But manually inlining styles is painful and error prone. I'm looking for a way to let users create messages using the same stylesheet as their website uses, but then converts the text to a more email appropriate format prior to sending. While it's certainly possible to write a tool that reads styles and the DOM, injecting the correct inline style for each element, I'm hoping there's already a tool available that does this. Unfortunately, my googling hasn't yielded any useful results. Do you know of any tools that can inline css styles? I'm not picky about the language, though if it's not open source, I'll probably just write my own.

  Read the article

• How to strip debug code during compile time in C++?

  - by juvenis

  Say I have a C++ function debugPrint(int foo). How can I most conveniently strip that from release builds? I do not want to surround every call to debugPrint with #ifdefs as it would be really time consuming. On the other hand, I want to be 100% sure that the compiler strips all the calls to that function, and the function itself from release builds. The stripping should happen also, if it's called with a parameter that results from a function call. E.g., debugPrint(getFoo());. In that case I want also the getFoo() call to be stripped. I understand that function inlining could be an option, but inlining is not guaranteed to be supported.

  Read the article

• Languages and VMs: Features that are hard to optimize and why

  - by mrjoltcola

  I'm doing a survey of features in preparation for a research project. Name a mainstream language or language feature that is hard to optimize, and why the feature is or isn't worth the price paid, or instead, just debunk my theories below with anecdotal evidence. Before anyone flags this as subjective, I am asking for specific examples of languages or features, and ideas for optimization of these features, or important features that I haven't considered. Also, any references to implementations that prove my theories right or wrong. Top on my list of hard to optimize features and my theories (some of my theories are untested and are based on thought experiments): 1) Runtime method overloading (aka multi-method dispatch or signature based dispatch). Is it hard to optimize when combined with features that allow runtime recompilation or method addition. Or is it just hard, anyway? Call site caching is a common optimization for many runtime systems, but multi-methods add additional complexity as well as making it less practical to inline methods. 2) Type morphing / variants (aka value based typing as opposed to variable based) Traditional optimizations simply cannot be applied when you don't know if the type of someting can change in a basic block. Combined with multi-methods, inlining must be done carefully if at all, and probably only for a given threshold of size of the callee. ie. it is easy to consider inlining simple property fetches (getters / setters) but inlining complex methods may result in code bloat. The other issue is I cannot just assign a variant to a register and JIT it to the native instructions because I have to carry around the type info, or every variable needs 2 registers instead of 1. On IA-32 this is inconvenient, even if improved with x64's extra registers. This is probably my favorite feature of dynamic languages, as it simplifies so many things from the programmer's perspective. 3) First class continuations - There are multiple ways to implement them, and I have done so in both of the most common approaches, one being stack copying and the other as implementing the runtime to use continuation passing style, cactus stacks, copy-on-write stack frames, and garbage collection. First class continuations have resource management issues, ie. we must save everything, in case the continuation is resumed, and I'm not aware if any languages support leaving a continuation with "intent" (ie. "I am not coming back here, so you may discard this copy of the world"). Having programmed in the threading model and the contination model, I know both can accomplish the same thing, but continuations' elegance imposes considerable complexity on the runtime and also may affect cache efficienty (locality of stack changes more with use of continuations and co-routines). The other issue is they just don't map to hardware. Optimizing continuations is optimizing for the less-common case, and as we know, the common case should be fast, and the less-common cases should be correct. 4) Pointer arithmetic and ability to mask pointers (storing in integers, etc.) Had to throw this in, but I could actually live without this quite easily. My feelings are that many of the high-level features, particularly in dynamic languages just don't map to hardware. Microprocessor implementations have billions of dollars of research behind the optimizations on the chip, yet the choice of language feature(s) may marginalize many of these features (features like caching, aliasing top of stack to register, instruction parallelism, return address buffers, loop buffers and branch prediction). Macro-applications of micro-features don't necessarily pan out like some developers like to think, and implementing many languages in a VM ends up mapping native ops into function calls (ie. the more dynamic a language is the more we must lookup/cache at runtime, nothing can be assumed, so our instruction mix is made up of a higher percentage of non-local branching than traditional, statically compiled code) and the only thing we can really JIT well is expression evaluation of non-dynamic types and operations on constant or immediate types. It is my gut feeling that bytecode virtual machines and JIT cores are perhaps not always justified for certain languages because of this. I welcome your answers.

  Read the article

• 10 Essential Tools for building ASP.NET Websites

  - by Stephen Walther

  I recently put together a simple public website created with ASP.NET for my company at Superexpert.com. I was surprised by the number of free tools that I ended up using to put together the website. Therefore, I thought it would be interesting to create a list of essential tools for building ASP.NET websites. These tools work equally well with both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC. Performance Tools After reading Steve Souders two (very excellent) books on front-end website performance High Performance Web Sites and Even Faster Web Sites, I have been super sensitive to front-end website performance. According to Souders’ Performance Golden Rule: “Optimize front-end performance first, that's where 80% or more of the end-user response time is spent” You can use the tools below to reduce the size of the images, JavaScript files, and CSS files used by an ASP.NET application. 1. Sprite and Image Optimization Framework CSS sprites were first described in an article written for A List Apart entitled CSS sprites: Image Slicing’s Kiss of Death. When you use sprites, you combine multiple images used by a website into a single image. Next, you use CSS trickery to display particular sub-images from the combined image in a webpage. The primary advantage of sprites is that they reduce the number of requests required to display a webpage. Requesting a single large image is faster than requesting multiple small images. In general, the more resources – images, JavaScript files, CSS files – that must be moved across the wire, the slower your website. However, most people avoid using sprites because they require a lot of work. You need to combine all of the images and write just the right CSS rules to display the sub-images. The Microsoft Sprite and Image Optimization Framework enables you to avoid all of this work. The framework combines the images for you automatically. Furthermore, the framework includes an ASP.NET Web Forms control and an ASP.NET MVC helper that makes it easy to display the sub-images. You can download the Sprite and Image Optimization Framework from CodePlex at http://aspnet.codeplex.com/releases/view/50869. The Sprite and Image Optimization Framework was written by Morgan McClean who worked in the office next to mine at Microsoft. Morgan was a scary smart Intern from Canada and we discussed the Framework while he was building it (I was really excited to learn that he was working on it). Morgan added some great advanced features to this framework. For example, the Sprite and Image Optimization Framework supports something called image inlining. When you use image inlining, the actual image is stored in the CSS file. Here’s an example of what image inlining looks like: .Home_StephenWalther_small-jpg { width:75px; height:100px; background: url( GdBTUEAALGOfPtRkwAAACBjSFJNAACHDwAAjA8AAP1SAACBQAAAfXkAAOmLAAA85QAAGcxzPIV3AAAKL s+zNfREAAAAASUVORK5CYII=) no-repeat 0% 0%; } The actual image (in this case a picture of me that is displayed on the home page of the Superexpert.com website) is stored in the CSS file. If you visit the Superexpert.com website then very few separate images are downloaded. For example, all of the images with a red border in the screenshot below take advantage of CSS sprites: Unfortunately, there are some significant Gotchas that you need to be aware of when using the Sprite and Image Optimization Framework. There are workarounds for these Gotchas. I plan to write about these Gotchas and workarounds in a future blog entry. 2. Microsoft Ajax Minifier Whenever possible you should combine, minify, compress, and cache with a far future header all of your JavaScript and CSS files. The Microsoft Ajax Minifier makes it easy to minify JavaScript and CSS files. Don’t confuse minification and compression. You need to do both. According to Souders, you can reduce the size of a JavaScript file by an additional 20% (on average) by minifying a JavaScript file after you compress the file. When you minify a JavaScript or CSS file, you use various tricks to reduce the size of the file before you compress the file. For example, you can minify a JavaScript file by replacing long JavaScript variables names with short variables names and removing unnecessary white space and comments. You can minify a CSS file by doing such things as replacing long color names such as #ffffff with shorter equivalents such as #fff. The Microsoft Ajax Minifier was created by Microsoft employee Ron Logan. Internally, this tool was being used by several large Microsoft websites. We also used the tool heavily on the ASP.NET team. I convinced Ron to publish the tool on CodePlex so that everyone in the world could take advantage of it. You can download the tool from the ASP.NET Ajax website and read documentation for the tool here. I created the installer for the Microsoft Ajax Minifier. When creating the installer, I also created a Visual Studio build task to make it easy to minify all of your JavaScript and CSS files whenever you do a build within Visual Studio automatically. Read the Ajax Minifier Quick Start to learn how to configure the build task. 3. ySlow The ySlow tool is a free add-on for Firefox created by Yahoo that enables you to test the front-end of your website. For example, here are the current test results for the Superexpert.com website: The Superexpert.com website has an overall score of B (not perfect but not bad). The ySlow tool is not perfect. For example, the Superexpert.com website received a failing grade of F for not using a Content Delivery Network even though the website using the Microsoft Ajax Content Delivery Network for JavaScript files such as jQuery. Uptime After publishing a website live to the world, you want to ensure that the website does not encounter any issues and that it stays live. I use the following tools to monitor the Superexpert.com website now that it is live. 4. ELMAH ELMAH stands for Error Logging Modules and Handlers for ASP.NET. ELMAH enables you to record any errors that happen at your website so you can review them in the future. You can download ELMAH for free from the ELMAH project website. ELMAH works great with both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC. You can configure ELMAH to store errors in a number of different stores including XML files, the Event Log, an Access database, a SQL database, an Oracle database, or in computer RAM. You also can configure ELMAH to email error messages to you when they happen. By default, you can access ELMAH by requesting the elmah.axd page from a website with ELMAH installed. Here’s what the elmah page looks like from the Superexpert.com website (this page is password-protected because secret information can be revealed in an error message): If you click on a particular error message, you can view the original Yellow Screen ASP.NET error message (even when the error message was never displayed to the actual user). I installed ELMAH by taking advantage of the new package manager for ASP.NET named NuGet (originally named NuPack). You can read the details about NuGet in the following blog entry by Scott Guthrie. You can download NuGet from CodePlex. 5. Pingdom I use Pingdom to verify that the Superexpert.com website is always up. You can sign up for Pingdom by visiting Pingdom.com. You can use Pingdom to monitor a single website for free. At the Pingdom website, you configure the frequency that your website gets pinged. I verify that the Superexpert.com website is up every 5 minutes. I have the Pingdom service verify that it can retrieve the string “Contact Us” from the website homepage. If your website goes down, you can configure Pingdom so that it sends an email, Twitter, SMS, or iPhone alert. I use the Pingdom iPhone app which looks like this: 6. Host Tracker If your website does go down then you need some way of determining whether it is a problem with your local network or if your website is down for everyone. I use a website named Host-Tracker.com to check how badly a website is down. Here’s what the Host-Tracker website displays for the Superexpert.com website when the website can be successfully pinged from everywhere in the world: Notice that Host-Tracker pinged the Superexpert.com website from 68 locations including Roubaix, France and Scranton, PA. Debugging I mean debugging in the broadest possible sense. I use the following tools when building a website to verify that I have not made a mistake. 7. HTML Spell Checker Why doesn’t Visual Studio have a built-in spell checker? Don’t know – I’ve always found this mysterious. Fortunately, however, a former member of the ASP.NET team wrote a free spell checker that you can use with your ASP.NET pages. I find a spell checker indispensible. It is easy to delude yourself that you are capable of perfect spelling. I’m always super embarrassed when I actually run the spell checking tool and discover all of my spelling mistakes. The fastest way to add the HTML Spell Checker extension to Visual Studio is to select the menu option Tools, Extension Manager within Visual Studio. Click on Online Gallery and search for HTML Spell Checker: 8. IIS SEO Toolkit If people cannot find your website through Google then you should not even bother to create it. Microsoft has a great extension for IIS named the IIS Search Engine Optimization Toolkit that you can use to identify issue with your website that would hurt its page rank. You also can use this tool to quickly create a sitemap for your website that you can submit to Google or Bing. You can even generate the sitemap for an ASP.NET MVC website. Here’s what the report overview for the Superexpert.com website looks like: Notice that the Sueprexpert.com website had plenty of violations. For example, there are 65 cases in which a page has a broken hyperlink. You can drill into these violations to identity the exact page and location where these violations occur. 9. LinqPad If your ASP.NET website accesses a database then you should be using LINQ to Entities with the Entity Framework. Using LINQ involves some magic. LINQ queries written in C# get converted into SQL queries for you. If you are not careful about how you write your LINQ queries, you could unintentionally build a really badly performing website. LinqPad is a free tool that enables you to experiment with your LINQ queries. It even works with Microsoft SQL CE 4 and Azure. You can use LinqPad to execute a LINQ to Entities query and see the results. You also can use it to see the resulting SQL that gets executed against the database: 10. .NET Reflector I use .NET Reflector daily. The .NET Reflector tool enables you to take any assembly and disassemble the assembly into C# or VB.NET code. You can use .NET Reflector to see the “Source Code” of an assembly even when you do not have the actual source code. You can download a free version of .NET Reflector from the Redgate website. I use .NET Reflector primarily to help me understand what code is doing internally. For example, I used .NET Reflector with the Sprite and Image Optimization Framework to better understand how the MVC Image helper works. Here’s part of the disassembled code from the Image helper class: Summary In this blog entry, I’ve discussed several of the tools that I used to create the Superexpert.com website. These are tools that I use to improve the performance, improve the SEO, verify the uptime, or debug the Superexpert.com website. All of the tools discussed in this blog entry are free. Furthermore, all of these tools work with both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC. Let me know if there are any tools that you use daily when building ASP.NET websites.

  Read the article

• Performance triage

  - by Dave

  Folks often ask me how to approach a suspected performance issue. My personal strategy is informed by the fact that I work on concurrency issues. (When you have a hammer everything looks like a nail, but I'll try to keep this general). A good starting point is to ask yourself if the observed performance matches your expectations. Expectations might be derived from known system performance limits, prototypes, and other software or environments that are comparable to your particular system-under-test. Some simple comparisons and microbenchmarks can be useful at this stage. It's also useful to write some very simple programs to validate some of the reported or expected system limits. Can that disk controller really tolerate and sustain 500 reads per second? To reduce the number of confounding factors it's better to try to answer that question with a very simple targeted program. And finally, nothing beats having familiarity with the technologies that underlying your particular layer. On the topic of confounding factors, as our technology stacks become deeper and less transparent, we often find our own technology working against us in some unexpected way to choke performance rather than simply running into some fundamental system limit. A good example is the warm-up time needed by just-in-time compilers in Java Virtual Machines. I won't delve too far into that particular hole except to say that it's rare to find good benchmarks and methodology for java code. Another example is power management on x86. Power management is great, but it can take a while for the CPUs to throttle up from low(er) frequencies to full throttle. And while I love "turbo" mode, it makes benchmarking applications with multiple threads a chore as you have to remember to turn it off and then back on otherwise short single-threaded runs may look abnormally fast compared to runs with higher thread counts. In general for performance characterization I disable turbo mode and fix the power governor at "performance" state. Another source of complexity is the scheduler, which I've discussed in prior blog entries. Lets say I have a running application and I want to better understand its behavior and performance. We'll presume it's warmed up, is under load, and is an execution mode representative of what we think the norm would be. It should be in steady-state, if a steady-state mode even exists. On Solaris the very first thing I'll do is take a set of "pstack" samples. Pstack briefly stops the process and walks each of the stacks, reporting symbolic information (if available) for each frame. For Java, pstack has been augmented to understand java frames, and even report inlining. A few pstack samples can provide powerful insight into what's actually going on inside the program. You'll be able to see calling patterns, which threads are blocked on what system calls or synchronization constructs, memory allocation, etc. If your code is CPU-bound then you'll get a good sense where the cycles are being spent. (I should caution that normal C/C++ inlining can diffuse an otherwise "hot" method into other methods. This is a rare instance where pstack sampling might not immediately point to the key problem). At this point you'll need to reconcile what you're seeing with pstack and your mental model of what you think the program should be doing. They're often rather different. And generally if there's a key performance issue, you'll spot it with a moderate number of samples. I'll also use OS-level observability tools to lock for the existence of bottlenecks where threads contend for locks; other situations where threads are blocked; and the distribution of threads over the system. On Solaris some good tools are mpstat and too a lesser degree, vmstat. Try running "mpstat -a 5" in one window while the application program runs concurrently. One key measure is the voluntary context switch rate "vctx" or "csw" which reflects threads descheduling themselves. It's also good to look at the user; system; and idle CPU percentages. This can give a broad but useful understanding if your threads are mostly parked or mostly running. For instance if your program makes heavy use of malloc/free, then it might be the case you're contending on the central malloc lock in the default allocator. In that case you'd see malloc calling lock in the stack traces, observe a high csw/vctx rate as threads block for the malloc lock, and your "usr" time would be less than expected. Solaris dtrace is a wonderful and invaluable performance tool as well, but in a sense you have to frame and articulate a meaningful and specific question to get a useful answer, so I tend not to use it for first-order screening of problems. It's also most effective for OS and software-level performance issues as opposed to HW-level issues. For that reason I recommend mpstat & pstack as my the 1st step in performance triage. If some other OS-level issue is evident then it's good to switch to dtrace to drill more deeply into the problem. Only after I've ruled out OS-level issues do I switch to using hardware performance counters to look for architectural impediments.

  Read the article

• How do .so files avoid problems associated with passing header-only templates like MS dll files have?

  - by Doug T.

  Based on the discussion around this question. I'd like to know how .so files/the ELF format/the gcc toolchain avoid problems passing classes defined purely in header files (like the std library). According to Jan in that answer, the dynamic linker/loader only picks one version of such a class to load if its defined in two .so files. So if two .so files have two definitions, perhaps with different compiler options/etc, the dynamic linker can pick one to use. Is this correct? How does this work with inlining? For example, MSVC inlines templates aggressively. This makes the solution I describe above untenable for dlls. Does Gcc never inline header-only templates like the std library as MSVC does? If so wouldn't that make the functionality of ELF described above ineffective in these cases?

  Read the article

• Macro vs. Static functions in Header

  - by wirrbel

  for a lot of quick tasks where one could employ a function f(x,y), in plain C, macros are used. I would like to ask specifically about these cases, that are solvable by a function call (i.e. macros used for inlining functions, not for code expansion of arbitrary code). Typically C functions are not inlined since they might be linked to from other C files. However, static C functions are only visible from within the C file they are defined in. Therefore they can be inlined by compilers. I have heard that a lot of macros should be replaced by turning them into static functions, because this produces safer code. Are there cases where this is a not good idea? Again: Not asking about Code-Production macros with ## alike constructs that cannot at all be expressed as a function.

  Read the article

• Objective-C optimization

  - by SpecialK

  Are there standard optimization tricks for Objective-C to make for faster execution along the lines of "inlining" frequent methods as in C++ or the "g++ -fast" tag?

  Read the article

• How do you pass SOME_LIB="-lmylib -lmylib2" in a BUILD_COMMAND for ExternalProject_Add()?

  - by Bill Katz

  I'm trying to pass a quoted string through BUILD_COMMAND in ExternalProject_Add() and every way I try it's getting mangled. The code is this: set (mylibs "-lmylib -lmylib2") ExternalProject_Add(Foo URL http://foo BUILD_COMMAND make SOME_LIB=${mylibs} BUILD_IN_SOURCE 1 ...) I've tried using backslash quotes, double quotes, inlining the whole thing, but every time, either the whole SOME_LIB=... part gets quoted or my injected quotes get escaped. Is it not possible to get quotes through to the command line?

  Read the article

• What is a good platform for building a game framework targetting both web and native languages?

  - by fuzzyTew

  I would like to develop (or find, if one is already in development) a framework with support for accelerated graphics and sound built on a system flexible enough to compile to the following: native ppc/x86/x86_64/arm binaries or a language which compiles to them javascript actionscript bytecode or a language which compiles to it (actionscript 3, haxe) optionally java I imagine, for example, creating an API where I can open windows and make OpenGL-like calls and the framework maps this in a relatively efficient manner to either WebGL with a canvas object, 3d graphics in Flash, OpenGL ES 2 with EGL, or desktop OpenGL in an X11, Windows, or Cocoa window. I have so far looked into these avenues: Building the game library in haXe Pros: Targets exist for php, javascript, actionscript bytecode, c++ High level, object oriented language Cons: No support for finally{} blocks or destructors, making resource cleanup difficult C++ target does not allow room for producing highly optimized libraries -- the foreign function interface requires all primitive types be boxed in a wrapper object, as if writing bindings for a scripting language; these feel unideal for real-time graphics and audio, especially exporting low-level functions. Doesn't seem quite yet mature Using the C preprocessor to create a translator, writing programs entirely with macros Pros: CPP is widespread and simple to use Cons: This is an arduous task and probably the wrong tool for the job CPP implementations differ widely in support for features (e.g. xcode cpp has no variadic macros despite claiming C99 compliance) There is little-to-no room for optimization in this route Using llvm's support for multiple backends to target c/c++ to web languages Pros: Can code in c/c++ LLVM is a very mature highly optimizing compiler performing e.g. global inlining Targets exist for actionscript (alchemy) and javascript (emscripten) Cons: Actionscript target is closed source, unmaintained, and buggy. Javascript targets do not use features of HTML5 for appropriate optimization (e.g. linear memory with typed arrays) and are immature An LLVM target must convert from low-level bytecode, so high-level constructs are lost and bloated unreadable code is created from translating individual instructions, which may be more difficult for an unprepared JIT to optimize. "jump" instructions cause problems for languages with no "goto" statements. Using libclang to write a translator from C/C++ to web languages Pros: A beautiful parsing library providing easy access to the code structure Can code in C/C++ Has sponsored developer effort from Apple Cons: Incomplete; current feature set targets IDEs. Basic operators are unexposed and must be manually parsed from the returned AST element to be identified. Translating code prior to compilation may forgo optimizations assumed in c/c++ such as inlining. Creating new code generators for clang to translate into web languages Pros: Can code in C/C++ as libclang Cons: There is no API; code structure is unstable A much larger job than using libclang; the innards of clang are complex Building the game library in Common Lisp Pros: Flexible, ancient, well-developed language Extensive introspection should ease writing translators Translators exist for at least javascript Cons: Unfamiliar language No standardized library functions, widely varying implementations Which of these avenues should I pursue? Do you know of any others, or any systems that might be useful? Does a general project like this exist somewhere already? Thank you for any input.

  Read the article

• Is there a way in a message-only language to define a whileTrue message without recursion or compile

  - by Richard Durr

  Smalltalk has the whileTrue:-Message implemented through recursion (in VisualWorks) or through compiler-inlining (in Squeak/Pharo). Is there a way to define such a method without using one of them? If not, is there a proof for that avaiable somewhere?

  Read the article

• Compiling in g++ for gprof

  - by myahya

  I do not understand the documentation for gprof regarding how to compile your program for profiling with gprof. In g++, is it required to compile with the -g option (debugging information) in a addition to the -pg option or not. In each case I get different results, and I would like to see where the bottlenecks in my application are in release mode, not in debug mode, where many optimizations are left out by the compiler (e.g. inlining)

  Read the article

• Function defined but not used in C

  - by thetna

  I have following code: static __inline__ LIST list_List(POINTER P) { return list_Cons(P,list_Nil()); } After compilation I got following warning: inlining is unlikely but function size may grow I removed the inline and changed into the following : static LIST list_List(POINTER P) { return list_Cons(P,list_Nil()); } Now I get the following warning: list_List is defined but not used. Can anybody please suggest me how can remove that warning.

  Read the article

• Good C++ books regarding Performance?

  - by Leon

  Besides the books everyone knows about, like Meyer's 3 Effective C++/STL books, are there any other really good C++ books specifically aimed towards performance code? Maybe this is for gaming, telecommunications, finance/high frequency etc? When I say performance I mean things where a normal C++ book wouldnt bother advising because the gain in performance isn't worthwhile for 95% of C++ developers. Maybe suggestions like avoiding virtual pointers, going into great depth about inlining etc? A book going into great depth on C++ memory allocation or multithreading performance would obviously be very useful.

  Read the article

• Why is HTML/Javascript minification beneficial

  - by Channel72

  Why is HTML/Javascript minification beneficial when the HTTP protocol already supports gzip data compression? I realize that Javascript/HTML minification has the potential to significantly reduce the size of Javascript/HTML files by removing unnecessary whitespace, and perhaps renaming variables to a few letters each, but doesn't the LZW algorithm do especially well when there are many repeated characters (e.g. lots of whitespace?) I realize that some Javascript minification tools do more than just reduce size. Google's closure compiler, for example, also tries to improve code performance by inlining functions and doing other analyses. But the primary purpose of Javascript minification is usually to reduce file size. I also realize there are other reasons you might want to minify aside from performace, such as code obfuscation. But again, that reason is not usually emphasized as much as performance gain and file size reduction. For example, Closure Compiler is not advertised as an obfuscation tool, but as a code size reducer and download-speed enhancer. So, how much performance do you really gain from Javascript/HTML minification when you're already significantly reducing file size with gzip compression?

  Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >