Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #10618
| From | Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: Small question with respect to scope and performace |
| Date | 2011-09-30 19:22 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <j65j00$nas$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <27725376.29.1317422561029.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqbu18> |
On 9/30/11 6:42 PM, sravanreddy001 wrote: > Hi, > > I have small doubt. > > There are two functions. > 1) stores lot of data.. atleast 100 MB > 2) another doesn't use above data. > > so, if 2 is called from 1. > where the contents of 1 be moved to stack? and 2. is called? > > In that case, does maintaining the data as global values, will reduce that overhead? (Security of data can be managed and not an issue) > > Thanks, > Sravan. If 1 stores its data on the stack, it will be there once the function creates it, and not "moved" there when 2 is called, so there is no overhead there. If 1 stores its data else where, it won't be moved there either. To be pedantic, actually this isn't the way the standard says it, because the standard never refers to "the stack". Typical implementation though is to place variables of storage class "auto" (as opposed to global, static or objects created on the heap) on the stack. 100 MB of data is large to be all "on the stack" (but possible), but my guess is that much of this data is apt to be in containers, where the control structure for the container may be on the stack, but most of the data will be on the heap.
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Small question with respect to scope and performace sravanreddy001 <sravanreddy001@gmail.com> - 2011-09-30 15:42 -0700
Re: Small question with respect to scope and performace Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-09-30 19:22 -0400
Re: Small question with respect to scope and performace Noah Roberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-09-30 15:51 -0700
Re: Small question with respect to scope and performace sravanreddy001 <sravanreddy001@gmail.com> - 2011-09-30 19:31 -0700
Re: Small question with respect to scope and performace Richard Damon <news.x.richarddamon@xoxy.net> - 2011-09-30 23:14 -0400
csiph-web