On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 03:25:44PM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote: > > - That sounds like a lot of maps. :) I guess you've looked at > > compacting some of them into a single map-to-struct? > > Oh, map-to-struct is the primary use. But compacting them won't work, > because the reason for the additional maps is that they have different > sets of keys (this set of paths meet a certain condition...). Only > one map contains all the paths involved in the merge. OK, I guess I'm not surprised that you would not have missed such an obvious optimization. :) > Also, several of those maps don't even store a value; and are really > just a set implemented via strmap (thus meaning the only bit of data I > need for some conditions is whether any given path meets it). It > seems slightly ugly to have to call strmap_put(map, string, NULL) for > those. I wonder if I should have another strset type much like your > suggesting for strintmap. Hmm... FWIW, khash does have a "set" mode where it avoids allocating the value array at all. What's the easiest way to benchmark merge-ort? I suspect I could swap out hashmap for khash (messily) in an hour or less. -Peff
