Subject: Re: [boost] [multiprecision] Help needed with strange constexpr slowdown
From: John Maddock (jz.maddock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-01-03 18:27:23
> I actually found that gcc produced better code when string literals were static
> const and not constexpr.
Thanks for everyone who's commented here or on the bug tracker.
What's clear is that pre-gcc-7 there is a very noticeable slowdown for
functions where a temporary with a constexpr constructor relies on the
named-return-value-optimisation.Â Even with gcc-7 there are non-trivial
changes to the assembly produced, where I would have expected them to be
identical (given that the temporary is constructed in a non-constexpr
context).Â Still, at least the performance is the same.Â In any case,
it's clear that these new features can have strange unintended consequences.
--- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. http://www.avg.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk