Changes in / [160af1e:f891424]


Ignore:
File:
1 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • doc/generic_types/generic_types.tex

    r160af1e rf891424  
    960960hence runtime checks are necessary to safely down-cast objects.
    961961The most notable difference among the implementations is in optimizations: \CFA and \CC inline the stack and pair elements into corresponding list and pair nodes, while the C and \CCV lack generic-type capability {\color{red}(AWKWARD) to store generic objects via pointers to separately-allocated objects}.
     962% The most notable difference among the implementations is in memory layout of generic types: \CFA and \CC inline the stack and pair elements into corresponding list and pair nodes, while C and \CCV lack such a capability and instead must store generic objects via pointers to separately-allocated objects.
    962963For the print benchmark, idiomatic printing is used: the C and \CFA variants used @cstdio.h@, while the \CC and \CCV variants used @iostream@.
    963964Preliminary tests show the difference has little runtime effect.
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.