Changes in / [c87cd93:4ae83a4b]

Location:

doc/generic_types

Files:

• .gitignore (modified) (1 diff)
• generic_types.tex (modified) (6 diffs)

doc/generic_types/.gitignore

@@ -17 +17 @@
 *.synctex.gz
 comment.cut
+timing.tex

doc/generic_types/generic_types.tex

@@ -214 +214 @@
 A design advantage is that, unlike \CC template-functions, \CFA polymorphic-functions are compatible with C \emph{separate compilation}, preventing compilation and code bloat.
 
-Since bare polymorphic-types provide a restricted set of available operations, \CFA provides a \emph{type assertion}~\cite{alphard} mechanism to provide further type information, where type assertions may be variable or function declarations that depend on a polymorphic type-variable.
+Since bare polymorphic-types provide a restricted set of available operations, \CFA provides a \emph{type assertion}~\cite[pp.~37-44]{Alphard} mechanism to provide further type information, where type assertions may be variable or function declarations that depend on a polymorphic type-variable.
 For example, the function @twice@ can be defined using the \CFA syntax for operator overloading:
 \newpage
@@ -280 +280 @@
 \lstDeleteShortInline@%
 \par\smallskip
-\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{\hspace{\parindent}}|@{\hspace{\parindent}}l@{}}
+\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{\hspace{1.5\parindent}}||@{\hspace{1.5\parindent}}l@{}}
 \begin{lstlisting}
 short int MAX = ...;
@@ -587 +587 @@
 \lstDeleteShortInline@%
 \par\smallskip
-\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{\hspace{\parindent}}|@{\hspace{\parindent}}l@{}}
+\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{\hspace{1.5\parindent}}||@{\hspace{1.5\parindent}}l@{}}
 \begin{lstlisting}
 int f( int, int );
@@ -616 +616 @@
 \lstDeleteShortInline@%
 \par\smallskip
-\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{\hspace{\parindent}}|@{\hspace{\parindent}}l@{}}
+\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{\hspace{1.5\parindent}}||@{\hspace{1.5\parindent}}l@{}}
 \begin{lstlisting}
 int x = 10;
@@ -658 +658 @@
 \lstDeleteShortInline@%
 \par\smallskip
-\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{\hspace{\parindent}}|@{\hspace{\parindent}}l@{}}
+\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{\hspace{1.5\parindent}}||@{\hspace{1.5\parindent}}l@{}}
 \begin{lstlisting}
 [int, int, long, double] x;
@@ -1019 +1019 @@
 \end{table}
 
-The C and \CCV variants are generally the slowest with the largest memory footprint, because to their less-efficient memory layout and the pointer-indirection necessary to implement generic types;
+The C and \CCV variants are generally the slowest with the largest memory footprint, because of their less-efficient memory layout and the pointer-indirection necessary to implement generic types;
 this inefficiency is exacerbated by the second level of generic types in the pair-based benchmarks.
 By contrast, the \CFA and \CC variants run in roughly equivalent time for both the integer and pair of @_Bool@ and @char@ because the storage layout is equivalent.