You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This was a suggestion from the maintainer of the https://github.com/stephenberry/glaze project. In a video call, he considered if sorting the RTTI addresses and performing a binary search would be helpful. I think if the number of elements for your class is large enough, a binary search would be better than an iterative address comparison, but the number would need to be reasonably high for the binary search to win out over an iterative search.
This issue is to track any sort of investigation into using a binary search for RTTI information. My hypothesis is that its generally slower than iterating. Where those cross over and binary search is faster, will take some quick benchmarking.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This was a suggestion from the maintainer of the https://github.com/stephenberry/glaze project. In a video call, he considered if sorting the RTTI addresses and performing a binary search would be helpful. I think if the number of elements for your class is large enough, a binary search would be better than an iterative address comparison, but the number would need to be reasonably high for the binary search to win out over an iterative search.
This issue is to track any sort of investigation into using a binary search for RTTI information. My hypothesis is that its generally slower than iterating. Where those cross over and binary search is faster, will take some quick benchmarking.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: