From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-36860-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 3611 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2015 04:32:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 36860
Received: (qmail 8714 invoked from network); 15 Oct 2015 04:32:30 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments
         :references:to:subject:mime-version:content-type;
        bh=WQMCnuibYTwn3H4/vTc9MolNFS+nKuV5atuI5l2tVo4=;
        b=NCTKryb0OiVybx733Cc5dK3I8eose8N3axqnTbydUGJXzoobuZiCWRwu8kOshDkwuc
         +xH3vBT3TO6zqbq4GxD1FfoPsmocXjPbjIfBCYvDcA5h6cWWJrJsQha5uSuHZEMHkX74
         92ZuhRF44e03ldwQuKnufhdNNp5n31vfRSKHtzmlKF7LTplD+BndIug337vyK+kcgnAh
         8v7LJXmHt2fDZ76LJImcPsn8OLGwvomc8HCsrim+SPKuCEI55JGx3IRJNpTtGxVh0Wgg
         Fy4CyvIEEZXxJ4IV6IbplBi9UARcuPkXyUMdN4gNAg5hK33JbxPO0YIUG0PRxu5XPQ7+
         OZUg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkNQtTFB6JZeRrkBWzudSK0gLHG+6XHc3Utr/iiKNYf7rnuR24O3gxnpUxRGshty+z4+J6T
X-Received: by 10.60.79.226 with SMTP id m2mr4511260oex.20.1444883548024;
        Wed, 14 Oct 2015 21:32:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
Message-Id: <151014213224.ZM15646@torch.brasslantern.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 21:32:24 -0700
In-Reply-To: <151014095009.ZM19954@torch.brasslantern.com>
Comments: In reply to Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
        "Re: Slowdown around 5.0.5-dev-0" (Oct 14,  9:50am)
References: <CAKc7PVDAS+yud1ChCsAMMKqNF=vEPcbN51czm56veKcS3WZxyg@mail.gmail.com> 
	<151010105849.ZM10144@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVCvfEk2x6JmXwVLM3BWJw6FUZK-M5qkAMqW=xQ=zhAShQ@mail.gmail.com> 
	<CAKc7PVBBP0NfNwn9AVxqKQyRUcKfSPVC4C-Y2mjEsTo5JHSZyw@mail.gmail.com> 
	<151010170623.ZM16166@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<151010232045.ZM12931@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVD8dU29eyfF-QJPUicFGUT6Kpomu+qZNungwnXpbjCH7Q@mail.gmail.com> 
	<151011091757.ZM27755@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVC-zdP=YBEoWYJVSG9aS_MRQXAY-mG0VJW+mbOmOGJZfQ@mail.gmail.com> 
	<151011103121.ZM8814@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVBkSP=RKPACOCcOT8wLJiXisTK3i-Pf0ZKXw-RS7F50WQ@mail.gmail.com> 
	<151011142204.ZM9103@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVBaRhL1BmiPqbhP-9iPC3vzA5NTpHtBJvSXJsMxF_4CDQ@mail.gmail.com> 
	<151012070105.ZM15099@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVBGmvRwWABnVd10eZQEn2qZ-ORo6JwoPQaXNzV9sgaOWg@mail.gmail.com> 
	<151012173304.ZM15477@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVDXo=UVqiRJd+eCo1hCFF-Lf79N46tOEL2w6R_8QP+gpA@mail.gmail.com> 
	<151013085246.ZM30504@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<CAKc7PVC4rcOD-Os9mgGf2JR4yY0CeG4m1kyPQ3gp67P_-xFDWg@mail.gmail.com> 
	<20151014142722.282d0c5a@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri> 
	<151014092536.ZM32511@torch.brasslantern.com> 
	<151014095009.ZM19954@torch.brasslantern.com>
X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005)
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Subject: Re: Slowdown around 5.0.5-dev-0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

On Oct 14,  9:50am, Bart Schaefer wrote:
} Subject: Re: Slowdown around 5.0.5-dev-0
}
} On Oct 14,  9:25am, Bart Schaefer wrote:
} }
} } NEWHEAPS() is O(1) where pushheap() is O(N) where N is the number of
} } arenas [...] the question is would it slow down in the more normal use
} } case of a mostly-empty heap and a lot of function calls
} 
} Just as a data point, I tried swapping out the push/pop pair in the
} source() function with NEWHEAPS/OLDHEAPS [...]
} NEWHEAPS was slightly slower

I've now gone through all the pushheap() in the code ... after ruling out
the cases where the code between push and pop couldn't be neatly wrapped
as a { block }, the only other pair it might make sense to replace is in
sort.c:strmetasort() and even that is questionable.

Given that we have direct evidence that it's beneficial to use NEWHEAPS
in doshfunc() in at least one case, I'll go ahead and commit 36853 and
we can see how it goes.