Re: [boost] [review] The review of Boost.DoubleEnded starts today: September 21 - September 30

Den 03-10-2017 kl. 00:02 skrev Benedek Thaler via Boost:

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Thorsten Ottosen wrote:

...

Hi,

Some more points to consider. I tried comparing push_back/unsafe_push_back a little. I don't see any performance speedup on my system if the loop body is just the push_back. If I make the loop a little more complicated than just a push_back, I get some differences:

Hi,

My concern with the above benchmark, is that it does not compare the same thing: it calls reserve here but not there (std::deque and boost::container::deque have no reserve).

Well, true. But since the unsafe_push_back on batch_deque needs to be preceded by a reserve, it would not be fair to exclude that.

I tried a similar test, comparing devector/vector/container.vector unsafe_push_back/push_back, using google benchmark. See the code attached. This is how I run it:

what is container.vector? Also, the file you attached uses batch_deque and std::vector, you test mentions 3 types .. kind regards Thorsten