RE: [GD-Windows] VS.net rants, was Re: VC++ lag

[Tom F. <to...@mu...>]

So that's why we got a sudden mad spike in our malloc/free profile (10% CPU
time!). I thought the original coder had gone bonkers and used STL
inappropriately, but in retrospect it was just fine with the old
implementation. *sigh*

Tom Forsyth - Muckyfoot bloke and Microsoft MVP.

This email is the product of your deranged imagination,
and does not in any way imply existence of the author.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Neil Stewart [mailto:ne...@r0...]
> Sent: 13 June 2003 15:15
> To: gam...@li...
> Subject: Re: [GD-Windows] VS.net rants, was Re: VC++ lag
> 
[snip]
> Here's one from me:
> 
> For some reason, they have changed the functionality of 
> vector::clear() to
> actually deallocate memory, rather than simply doing 
> erase(begin(), end()),
> which leaves the memory allocated. If, like a lot of people, 
> you are relying
> on the performance characteristics of non-deallocation, you could be
> suffering a serious performance loss from this "small" 
> change. I was more
> than a little bit disgusted when I discovered this. Needless 
> to say, we
> don't use that particular implementation any more.
> 
> - Neil.