From kde-core-devel Sat Sep 22 14:59:19 2001 From: Harri Porten Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 14:59:19 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: Reducing the number of conflicts in libraries X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=100117079802488 On Fri, 21 Sep 2001, Lubos Lunak wrote: > > Has been done for the upcoming Beta 6. Any other striking places ? > > I just hope that the tradeoffs memory vs. speed are always justified. > > Hmm, I don't see any such changes in today's rsync. As for the memory vs. Takes a while to sync. > speed, if you use the put_vtable_only_here() hack, that's just one more > vtable entry and no speed loss. But isn't every new vtable entry bad per se ? I don't want Waldo knocking at my door afterwards ;) > Non-inline template methods should be only instantiated when needed, but > this still can lead to duplicates. Separating the non-inline methods from the > template class definition would usually result in link errors, forcing the > developer to use explicit instantiation. So there would have to be some > #ifdef controlling whether to separate or not. OK. That answers my question. > I was just asking if people think it would be worth it. I think I'll try to > compile qt and part of kdelibs with -fno-implicit-templates and only explicit > instantiation, so I can tell how this affects libraries sizes. Adding this > explicit template instantiation to Qt can wait. Maybe it won't be worth the > trouble at all, or it could be used only in some rather simple cases. Coolo was experimented with that IIRC. At the same time bero played with -repo. I once tried it with STL code and gave up cause it unveiled errors (in the template code) that normally don't show up. Harri.