You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The current code is complicated because the const& versions return const&. Which leads to bugs without && versions. It is worth examining whether returning by a value is performant enough to eliminate the && version.
The way to approach it is to create a benchmark that runs indexable getter in a loop. The parameter to tweak would be the size of the Geometry it return. We would want to see how it affects things, and whether there is an inflection point. Would need to run it for the different compilers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The current code is complicated because the
const&
versions returnconst&
. Which leads to bugs without&&
versions. It is worth examining whether returning by a value is performant enough to eliminate the&&
version.The way to approach it is to create a benchmark that runs indexable getter in a loop. The parameter to tweak would be the size of the Geometry it return. We would want to see how it affects things, and whether there is an inflection point. Would need to run it for the different compilers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: