ericblake@xxxxxxxxxxx (Eric Blake) writes: > However, it seems like there are two things we can improve. First, should > autom4te experiment with changing the default hash size, using the > -H option? By default, m4 1.4.4 uses a 509 bucket hash table, with no > dynamic growth. Without a larger table, configure scripts are so complex > that you are generating loads of collisions and extra time spent comparing > strings. But what size would be the best trade of memory for speed, and > how do we judge how complex the configure script is? Is there a good reason why m4 should not use a hash table that grows dynamically? It is easier to deal with software that can figure out parameters on its own rather than having to be told. -- Ben Pfaff email: blp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx web: http://benpfaff.org _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
