A custom, highly-specialized, special-purpose standard-compliant C++ allocator The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InC++ custom memory allocatorMaximum sum subarray efficiency — divide and conquer w/ vectorsNecklace counting problem-with consecutive prime constraintSubdividing intervals that contain the largest error valuesC++ fixed-size queue full/empty signalingC++ Queue ImplementationUndirected Unweighted Graph Implementation - C++Sorted vector/set class that works with simple types (char, int, double, etc…)Generalizing std::minmax_elementC++ object pool using C memory pool as base

Pristine Bit Checking

Find number from a line and get the quotient

Inflated grade on resume at previous job, might former employer tell new employer?

The difference between dialogue marks

Extreme, unacceptable situation and I can't attend work tomorrow morning

How was Skylab's orbit inclination chosen?

Adding labels to a table: columns and rows

Operational amplifier basics

What is the motivation for a law requiring 2 parties to consent for recording a conversation

"as much details as you can remember"

How are circuits which use complex ICs normally simulated?

Dual Citizen. Exited the US on Italian passport recently

How to answer pointed "are you quitting" questioning when I don't want them to suspect

On the insanity of kings as an argument against monarchy

Inline version of a function returns different value than non-inline version

Is flight data recorder erased after every flight?

Are USB sockets on wall outlets live all the time, even when the switch is off?

Falsification in Math vs Science

Is there a general name for the setup in which payoffs are not known exactly but players try to influence each other's perception of the payoffs?

Where to refill my bottle in India?

Why is the maximum length of OpenWrt’s root password 8 characters?

Flying Bloodthirsty Lampshades

Why can Shazam fly?

What tool would a Roman-age civilization have to grind silver and other metals into dust?



A custom, highly-specialized, special-purpose standard-compliant C++ allocator



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InC++ custom memory allocatorMaximum sum subarray efficiency — divide and conquer w/ vectorsNecklace counting problem-with consecutive prime constraintSubdividing intervals that contain the largest error valuesC++ fixed-size queue full/empty signalingC++ Queue ImplementationUndirected Unweighted Graph Implementation - C++Sorted vector/set class that works with simple types (char, int, double, etc…)Generalizing std::minmax_elementC++ object pool using C memory pool as base



.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








2












$begingroup$


Brief Preface



I recognize that there are many nuances and requirements for a standard-compatible allocator. There are a number of questions here covering a range of topics associated with allocators. I realize that the requirements set out by the standard are critical to ensuring that the allocator functions correctly in all cases, doesn't leak memory, doesn't cause undefined-behaviour, etc. This is particularly true where the allocator is meant to be used (or at least, can be used) in a wide range of use cases, with a variety of underlying types and different standard containers, object sizes, etc.



In contrast, I have a very specific use case where I personally strictly control all of the conditions associated with its use, as I describe in detail below. Consequently, I believe that what I've done is perfectly acceptable given the highly-specific nature of what I'm trying to implement.



I'm hoping someone with far more experience and understanding than me can either confirm that the description below is acceptable or point out the problems (and, ideally, how to fix them too).



Overview / Specific Requirements



In a nutshell, I'm trying to write an allocator that is to be used within my own code and for a single, specific purpose:



  • I need "a few" std::vector (probably uint16_t), with a fixed (at runtime) number of elements. I'm benchmarking to determine the best tradeoff of performance/space for the exact integer type[1]

  • As noted, the number of elements is always the same, but it depends on some runtime configuration data passed to the application

  • The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded. The exact number is handled by a library providing an implementation of parallel::for(execution::par_unseq, ...)

  • The vectors are constructed by me (i.e. so I know with certainty that they will always be constructed with N elements)

[1] The value of the vectors are used to conditionally copy a float from one of 2 vectors to a target: c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays of float, rand_vec is the std::vector I'm trying to figure out here, and threshold is a single variable of type integer_tbd. The code compiles as SSE SIMD operations. I do not remember the details of this, but I believe that this requires additional shifting instructions if the ints are smaller than the floats.



On this basis, I've written a very simple allocator, with a single static boost::lockfree::queue as the free-list. Given that I will construct the vectors myself and they will go out of scope when I'm finished with them, I know with certainty that all calls to alloc::deallocate(T*, size_t) will always return vectors of the same size, so I believe that I can simply push them back onto the queue without worrying about a pointer to a differently-sized allocation being pushed onto the free-list.



As noted in the code below, I've added in runtime tests for both the allocate and deallocate functions for now, while I've been confirming for myself that these situations cannot and will not occur. Again, I believe it is unquestionably safe to delete these runtime tests. Although some advice would be appreciated here too -- considering the surrounding code, I think they should be handled adequately by the branch predictor so they don't have a significant runtime cost (although without instrumenting, hard to say for 100% certain).



In a nutshell - as far as I can tell, everything here is completely within my control, completely deterministic in behaviour, and, thus, completely safe. This is also suggested when running the code under typical conditions -- there are no segfaults, etc. I haven't yet tried running with sanitizers yet -- I was hoping to get some feedback and guidance before doing so.



I should point out that my code runs 2× faster than using std::allocator, which is at least qualitatively to be expected.




CR_Vector_Allocator.hpp



class CR_Vector_Allocator 

using T = CR_Range_t; // probably uint16_t or uint32_t, set elsewhere.

private:
using free_list_type = boost::lockfree::queue>;

static free_list_type free_list;

public:
T* allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(T* p, size_t) noexcept;

using value_type = T;
using pointer = T*;
using reference = T&;

template struct rebind using other = CR_Vector_Allocator;;
;


CR_Vector_Allocator.cc



CR_Vector_Allocator::T* CR_Vector_Allocator::allocate(size_t n) 

if (n <= 1)
throw std::runtime_error("Unexpected number of elements to initialize: " +
std::to_string(n));

T* addr_;
if (free_list.pop(addr_)) return addr_;

addr_ = reinterpret_cast<T*>(std::malloc(n * sizeof(T)));
return addr_;


void CR_Vector_Allocator::deallocate(T* p, size_t n) noexcept
if (n <= 1) // should never happen. but just in case, I don't want to leak
free(p);
else
free_list.push(p);


CR_Vector_Allocator::free_list_type CR_Vector_Allocator::free_list;



It is used in the following manner:



using CR_Vector_t = std::vector<uint16_t, CR_Vector_Allocator>;

CR_Vector_t Generate_CR_Vector()

/* total_parameters is a member of the same class
as this member function and is defined elsewhere */
CR_Vector_t cr_vec (total_parameters);
std::uniform_int_distribution<uint16_t> dist_;

/* urng_ is a member variable of type std::mt19937_64 in the class */
std::generate(cr_vec.begin(), cr_vec.end(), [this, &dist_]()
return dist_(this->urng_););
return cr_vec;


void Prepare_Next_Generation(...)
/*
...
*/
using hpx::parallel::execution::par_unseq;
hpx::parallel::for_loop_n(par_unseq, 0l, pop_size, [this](int64_t idx)
auto crossovers = Generate_CR_Vector();
auto new_parameters = Generate_New_Parameters(/* ... */, std::move(crossovers));




Any feedback, guidance or rebukes would be greatly appreciated.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Please fix the typo in your code (Ctrl+F queue>;) and make sure that what you've posted is compileable.
    $endgroup$
    – Quuxplusone
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    > "c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays". It's not about the allocator, but having only one array where a[i], b[i] and c[i] are neighbors would improve locality and probably performance. It's not much but a lot easier to do than implementing allocators
    $endgroup$
    – papagaga
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    "The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded": is the number or the bound known at some point in the program?
    $endgroup$
    – papagaga
    3 hours ago

















2












$begingroup$


Brief Preface



I recognize that there are many nuances and requirements for a standard-compatible allocator. There are a number of questions here covering a range of topics associated with allocators. I realize that the requirements set out by the standard are critical to ensuring that the allocator functions correctly in all cases, doesn't leak memory, doesn't cause undefined-behaviour, etc. This is particularly true where the allocator is meant to be used (or at least, can be used) in a wide range of use cases, with a variety of underlying types and different standard containers, object sizes, etc.



In contrast, I have a very specific use case where I personally strictly control all of the conditions associated with its use, as I describe in detail below. Consequently, I believe that what I've done is perfectly acceptable given the highly-specific nature of what I'm trying to implement.



I'm hoping someone with far more experience and understanding than me can either confirm that the description below is acceptable or point out the problems (and, ideally, how to fix them too).



Overview / Specific Requirements



In a nutshell, I'm trying to write an allocator that is to be used within my own code and for a single, specific purpose:



  • I need "a few" std::vector (probably uint16_t), with a fixed (at runtime) number of elements. I'm benchmarking to determine the best tradeoff of performance/space for the exact integer type[1]

  • As noted, the number of elements is always the same, but it depends on some runtime configuration data passed to the application

  • The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded. The exact number is handled by a library providing an implementation of parallel::for(execution::par_unseq, ...)

  • The vectors are constructed by me (i.e. so I know with certainty that they will always be constructed with N elements)

[1] The value of the vectors are used to conditionally copy a float from one of 2 vectors to a target: c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays of float, rand_vec is the std::vector I'm trying to figure out here, and threshold is a single variable of type integer_tbd. The code compiles as SSE SIMD operations. I do not remember the details of this, but I believe that this requires additional shifting instructions if the ints are smaller than the floats.



On this basis, I've written a very simple allocator, with a single static boost::lockfree::queue as the free-list. Given that I will construct the vectors myself and they will go out of scope when I'm finished with them, I know with certainty that all calls to alloc::deallocate(T*, size_t) will always return vectors of the same size, so I believe that I can simply push them back onto the queue without worrying about a pointer to a differently-sized allocation being pushed onto the free-list.



As noted in the code below, I've added in runtime tests for both the allocate and deallocate functions for now, while I've been confirming for myself that these situations cannot and will not occur. Again, I believe it is unquestionably safe to delete these runtime tests. Although some advice would be appreciated here too -- considering the surrounding code, I think they should be handled adequately by the branch predictor so they don't have a significant runtime cost (although without instrumenting, hard to say for 100% certain).



In a nutshell - as far as I can tell, everything here is completely within my control, completely deterministic in behaviour, and, thus, completely safe. This is also suggested when running the code under typical conditions -- there are no segfaults, etc. I haven't yet tried running with sanitizers yet -- I was hoping to get some feedback and guidance before doing so.



I should point out that my code runs 2× faster than using std::allocator, which is at least qualitatively to be expected.




CR_Vector_Allocator.hpp



class CR_Vector_Allocator 

using T = CR_Range_t; // probably uint16_t or uint32_t, set elsewhere.

private:
using free_list_type = boost::lockfree::queue>;

static free_list_type free_list;

public:
T* allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(T* p, size_t) noexcept;

using value_type = T;
using pointer = T*;
using reference = T&;

template struct rebind using other = CR_Vector_Allocator;;
;


CR_Vector_Allocator.cc



CR_Vector_Allocator::T* CR_Vector_Allocator::allocate(size_t n) 

if (n <= 1)
throw std::runtime_error("Unexpected number of elements to initialize: " +
std::to_string(n));

T* addr_;
if (free_list.pop(addr_)) return addr_;

addr_ = reinterpret_cast<T*>(std::malloc(n * sizeof(T)));
return addr_;


void CR_Vector_Allocator::deallocate(T* p, size_t n) noexcept
if (n <= 1) // should never happen. but just in case, I don't want to leak
free(p);
else
free_list.push(p);


CR_Vector_Allocator::free_list_type CR_Vector_Allocator::free_list;



It is used in the following manner:



using CR_Vector_t = std::vector<uint16_t, CR_Vector_Allocator>;

CR_Vector_t Generate_CR_Vector()

/* total_parameters is a member of the same class
as this member function and is defined elsewhere */
CR_Vector_t cr_vec (total_parameters);
std::uniform_int_distribution<uint16_t> dist_;

/* urng_ is a member variable of type std::mt19937_64 in the class */
std::generate(cr_vec.begin(), cr_vec.end(), [this, &dist_]()
return dist_(this->urng_););
return cr_vec;


void Prepare_Next_Generation(...)
/*
...
*/
using hpx::parallel::execution::par_unseq;
hpx::parallel::for_loop_n(par_unseq, 0l, pop_size, [this](int64_t idx)
auto crossovers = Generate_CR_Vector();
auto new_parameters = Generate_New_Parameters(/* ... */, std::move(crossovers));




Any feedback, guidance or rebukes would be greatly appreciated.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    Please fix the typo in your code (Ctrl+F queue>;) and make sure that what you've posted is compileable.
    $endgroup$
    – Quuxplusone
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    > "c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays". It's not about the allocator, but having only one array where a[i], b[i] and c[i] are neighbors would improve locality and probably performance. It's not much but a lot easier to do than implementing allocators
    $endgroup$
    – papagaga
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    "The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded": is the number or the bound known at some point in the program?
    $endgroup$
    – papagaga
    3 hours ago













2












2








2





$begingroup$


Brief Preface



I recognize that there are many nuances and requirements for a standard-compatible allocator. There are a number of questions here covering a range of topics associated with allocators. I realize that the requirements set out by the standard are critical to ensuring that the allocator functions correctly in all cases, doesn't leak memory, doesn't cause undefined-behaviour, etc. This is particularly true where the allocator is meant to be used (or at least, can be used) in a wide range of use cases, with a variety of underlying types and different standard containers, object sizes, etc.



In contrast, I have a very specific use case where I personally strictly control all of the conditions associated with its use, as I describe in detail below. Consequently, I believe that what I've done is perfectly acceptable given the highly-specific nature of what I'm trying to implement.



I'm hoping someone with far more experience and understanding than me can either confirm that the description below is acceptable or point out the problems (and, ideally, how to fix them too).



Overview / Specific Requirements



In a nutshell, I'm trying to write an allocator that is to be used within my own code and for a single, specific purpose:



  • I need "a few" std::vector (probably uint16_t), with a fixed (at runtime) number of elements. I'm benchmarking to determine the best tradeoff of performance/space for the exact integer type[1]

  • As noted, the number of elements is always the same, but it depends on some runtime configuration data passed to the application

  • The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded. The exact number is handled by a library providing an implementation of parallel::for(execution::par_unseq, ...)

  • The vectors are constructed by me (i.e. so I know with certainty that they will always be constructed with N elements)

[1] The value of the vectors are used to conditionally copy a float from one of 2 vectors to a target: c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays of float, rand_vec is the std::vector I'm trying to figure out here, and threshold is a single variable of type integer_tbd. The code compiles as SSE SIMD operations. I do not remember the details of this, but I believe that this requires additional shifting instructions if the ints are smaller than the floats.



On this basis, I've written a very simple allocator, with a single static boost::lockfree::queue as the free-list. Given that I will construct the vectors myself and they will go out of scope when I'm finished with them, I know with certainty that all calls to alloc::deallocate(T*, size_t) will always return vectors of the same size, so I believe that I can simply push them back onto the queue without worrying about a pointer to a differently-sized allocation being pushed onto the free-list.



As noted in the code below, I've added in runtime tests for both the allocate and deallocate functions for now, while I've been confirming for myself that these situations cannot and will not occur. Again, I believe it is unquestionably safe to delete these runtime tests. Although some advice would be appreciated here too -- considering the surrounding code, I think they should be handled adequately by the branch predictor so they don't have a significant runtime cost (although without instrumenting, hard to say for 100% certain).



In a nutshell - as far as I can tell, everything here is completely within my control, completely deterministic in behaviour, and, thus, completely safe. This is also suggested when running the code under typical conditions -- there are no segfaults, etc. I haven't yet tried running with sanitizers yet -- I was hoping to get some feedback and guidance before doing so.



I should point out that my code runs 2× faster than using std::allocator, which is at least qualitatively to be expected.




CR_Vector_Allocator.hpp



class CR_Vector_Allocator 

using T = CR_Range_t; // probably uint16_t or uint32_t, set elsewhere.

private:
using free_list_type = boost::lockfree::queue>;

static free_list_type free_list;

public:
T* allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(T* p, size_t) noexcept;

using value_type = T;
using pointer = T*;
using reference = T&;

template struct rebind using other = CR_Vector_Allocator;;
;


CR_Vector_Allocator.cc



CR_Vector_Allocator::T* CR_Vector_Allocator::allocate(size_t n) 

if (n <= 1)
throw std::runtime_error("Unexpected number of elements to initialize: " +
std::to_string(n));

T* addr_;
if (free_list.pop(addr_)) return addr_;

addr_ = reinterpret_cast<T*>(std::malloc(n * sizeof(T)));
return addr_;


void CR_Vector_Allocator::deallocate(T* p, size_t n) noexcept
if (n <= 1) // should never happen. but just in case, I don't want to leak
free(p);
else
free_list.push(p);


CR_Vector_Allocator::free_list_type CR_Vector_Allocator::free_list;



It is used in the following manner:



using CR_Vector_t = std::vector<uint16_t, CR_Vector_Allocator>;

CR_Vector_t Generate_CR_Vector()

/* total_parameters is a member of the same class
as this member function and is defined elsewhere */
CR_Vector_t cr_vec (total_parameters);
std::uniform_int_distribution<uint16_t> dist_;

/* urng_ is a member variable of type std::mt19937_64 in the class */
std::generate(cr_vec.begin(), cr_vec.end(), [this, &dist_]()
return dist_(this->urng_););
return cr_vec;


void Prepare_Next_Generation(...)
/*
...
*/
using hpx::parallel::execution::par_unseq;
hpx::parallel::for_loop_n(par_unseq, 0l, pop_size, [this](int64_t idx)
auto crossovers = Generate_CR_Vector();
auto new_parameters = Generate_New_Parameters(/* ... */, std::move(crossovers));




Any feedback, guidance or rebukes would be greatly appreciated.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




Brief Preface



I recognize that there are many nuances and requirements for a standard-compatible allocator. There are a number of questions here covering a range of topics associated with allocators. I realize that the requirements set out by the standard are critical to ensuring that the allocator functions correctly in all cases, doesn't leak memory, doesn't cause undefined-behaviour, etc. This is particularly true where the allocator is meant to be used (or at least, can be used) in a wide range of use cases, with a variety of underlying types and different standard containers, object sizes, etc.



In contrast, I have a very specific use case where I personally strictly control all of the conditions associated with its use, as I describe in detail below. Consequently, I believe that what I've done is perfectly acceptable given the highly-specific nature of what I'm trying to implement.



I'm hoping someone with far more experience and understanding than me can either confirm that the description below is acceptable or point out the problems (and, ideally, how to fix them too).



Overview / Specific Requirements



In a nutshell, I'm trying to write an allocator that is to be used within my own code and for a single, specific purpose:



  • I need "a few" std::vector (probably uint16_t), with a fixed (at runtime) number of elements. I'm benchmarking to determine the best tradeoff of performance/space for the exact integer type[1]

  • As noted, the number of elements is always the same, but it depends on some runtime configuration data passed to the application

  • The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded. The exact number is handled by a library providing an implementation of parallel::for(execution::par_unseq, ...)

  • The vectors are constructed by me (i.e. so I know with certainty that they will always be constructed with N elements)

[1] The value of the vectors are used to conditionally copy a float from one of 2 vectors to a target: c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays of float, rand_vec is the std::vector I'm trying to figure out here, and threshold is a single variable of type integer_tbd. The code compiles as SSE SIMD operations. I do not remember the details of this, but I believe that this requires additional shifting instructions if the ints are smaller than the floats.



On this basis, I've written a very simple allocator, with a single static boost::lockfree::queue as the free-list. Given that I will construct the vectors myself and they will go out of scope when I'm finished with them, I know with certainty that all calls to alloc::deallocate(T*, size_t) will always return vectors of the same size, so I believe that I can simply push them back onto the queue without worrying about a pointer to a differently-sized allocation being pushed onto the free-list.



As noted in the code below, I've added in runtime tests for both the allocate and deallocate functions for now, while I've been confirming for myself that these situations cannot and will not occur. Again, I believe it is unquestionably safe to delete these runtime tests. Although some advice would be appreciated here too -- considering the surrounding code, I think they should be handled adequately by the branch predictor so they don't have a significant runtime cost (although without instrumenting, hard to say for 100% certain).



In a nutshell - as far as I can tell, everything here is completely within my control, completely deterministic in behaviour, and, thus, completely safe. This is also suggested when running the code under typical conditions -- there are no segfaults, etc. I haven't yet tried running with sanitizers yet -- I was hoping to get some feedback and guidance before doing so.



I should point out that my code runs 2× faster than using std::allocator, which is at least qualitatively to be expected.




CR_Vector_Allocator.hpp



class CR_Vector_Allocator 

using T = CR_Range_t; // probably uint16_t or uint32_t, set elsewhere.

private:
using free_list_type = boost::lockfree::queue>;

static free_list_type free_list;

public:
T* allocate(size_t);
void deallocate(T* p, size_t) noexcept;

using value_type = T;
using pointer = T*;
using reference = T&;

template struct rebind using other = CR_Vector_Allocator;;
;


CR_Vector_Allocator.cc



CR_Vector_Allocator::T* CR_Vector_Allocator::allocate(size_t n) 

if (n <= 1)
throw std::runtime_error("Unexpected number of elements to initialize: " +
std::to_string(n));

T* addr_;
if (free_list.pop(addr_)) return addr_;

addr_ = reinterpret_cast<T*>(std::malloc(n * sizeof(T)));
return addr_;


void CR_Vector_Allocator::deallocate(T* p, size_t n) noexcept
if (n <= 1) // should never happen. but just in case, I don't want to leak
free(p);
else
free_list.push(p);


CR_Vector_Allocator::free_list_type CR_Vector_Allocator::free_list;



It is used in the following manner:



using CR_Vector_t = std::vector<uint16_t, CR_Vector_Allocator>;

CR_Vector_t Generate_CR_Vector()

/* total_parameters is a member of the same class
as this member function and is defined elsewhere */
CR_Vector_t cr_vec (total_parameters);
std::uniform_int_distribution<uint16_t> dist_;

/* urng_ is a member variable of type std::mt19937_64 in the class */
std::generate(cr_vec.begin(), cr_vec.end(), [this, &dist_]()
return dist_(this->urng_););
return cr_vec;


void Prepare_Next_Generation(...)
/*
...
*/
using hpx::parallel::execution::par_unseq;
hpx::parallel::for_loop_n(par_unseq, 0l, pop_size, [this](int64_t idx)
auto crossovers = Generate_CR_Vector();
auto new_parameters = Generate_New_Parameters(/* ... */, std::move(crossovers));




Any feedback, guidance or rebukes would be greatly appreciated.







c++ memory-management






share|improve this question









New contributor




Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 43 mins ago









Toby Speight

27.1k742119




27.1k742119






New contributor




Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 8 hours ago









Shmuel LevineShmuel Levine

1111




1111




New contributor




Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Shmuel Levine is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • $begingroup$
    Please fix the typo in your code (Ctrl+F queue>;) and make sure that what you've posted is compileable.
    $endgroup$
    – Quuxplusone
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    > "c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays". It's not about the allocator, but having only one array where a[i], b[i] and c[i] are neighbors would improve locality and probably performance. It's not much but a lot easier to do than implementing allocators
    $endgroup$
    – papagaga
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    "The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded": is the number or the bound known at some point in the program?
    $endgroup$
    – papagaga
    3 hours ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Please fix the typo in your code (Ctrl+F queue>;) and make sure that what you've posted is compileable.
    $endgroup$
    – Quuxplusone
    7 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    > "c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays". It's not about the allocator, but having only one array where a[i], b[i] and c[i] are neighbors would improve locality and probably performance. It's not much but a lot easier to do than implementing allocators
    $endgroup$
    – papagaga
    3 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    "The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded": is the number or the bound known at some point in the program?
    $endgroup$
    – papagaga
    3 hours ago















$begingroup$
Please fix the typo in your code (Ctrl+F queue>;) and make sure that what you've posted is compileable.
$endgroup$
– Quuxplusone
7 hours ago




$begingroup$
Please fix the typo in your code (Ctrl+F queue>;) and make sure that what you've posted is compileable.
$endgroup$
– Quuxplusone
7 hours ago












$begingroup$
> "c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays". It's not about the allocator, but having only one array where a[i], b[i] and c[i] are neighbors would improve locality and probably performance. It's not much but a lot easier to do than implementing allocators
$endgroup$
– papagaga
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
> "c[i] = rand_vec[i] < threshold ? a[i] : b[i] where a, b, c are contiguous arrays". It's not about the allocator, but having only one array where a[i], b[i] and c[i] are neighbors would improve locality and probably performance. It's not much but a lot easier to do than implementing allocators
$endgroup$
– papagaga
3 hours ago












$begingroup$
"The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded": is the number or the bound known at some point in the program?
$endgroup$
– papagaga
3 hours ago




$begingroup$
"The number of vectors is also either fixed or at least bounded": is the number or the bound known at some point in the program?
$endgroup$
– papagaga
3 hours ago










0






active

oldest

votes












Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "196"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);






Shmuel Levine is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f217172%2fa-custom-highly-specialized-special-purpose-standard-compliant-c-allocator%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























0






active

oldest

votes








0






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








Shmuel Levine is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









draft saved

draft discarded


















Shmuel Levine is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












Shmuel Levine is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











Shmuel Levine is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f217172%2fa-custom-highly-specialized-special-purpose-standard-compliant-c-allocator%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

名間水力發電廠 目录 沿革 設施 鄰近設施 註釋 外部連結 导航菜单23°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.7113923°50′10″N 120°42′41″E / 23.83611°N 120.71139°E / 23.83611; 120.71139計畫概要原始内容臺灣第一座BOT 模式開發的水力發電廠-名間水力電廠名間水力發電廠 水利署首件BOT案原始内容《小檔案》名間電廠 首座BOT水力發電廠原始内容名間電廠BOT - 經濟部水利署中區水資源局

Prove that NP is closed under karp reduction?Space(n) not closed under Karp reductions - what about NTime(n)?Class P is closed under rotation?Prove or disprove that $NL$ is closed under polynomial many-one reductions$mathbfNC_2$ is closed under log-space reductionOn Karp reductionwhen can I know if a class (complexity) is closed under reduction (cook/karp)Check if class $PSPACE$ is closed under polyonomially space reductionIs NPSPACE also closed under polynomial-time reduction and under log-space reduction?Prove PSPACE is closed under complement?Prove PSPACE is closed under union?

Is my guitar’s action too high? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Strings too stiff on a recently purchased acoustic guitar | Cort AD880CEIs the action of my guitar really high?Μy little finger is too weak to play guitarWith guitar, how long should I give my fingers to strengthen / callous?When playing a fret the guitar sounds mutedPlaying (Barre) chords up the guitar neckI think my guitar strings are wound too tight and I can't play barre chordsF barre chord on an SG guitarHow to find to the right strings of a barre chord by feel?High action on higher fret on my steel acoustic guitar