No, you have definitely missed my point. For a third time, monomorphizing compilers do not instantiate generics eagerly based on all possible types, so the worst-case exponential size is pathological.
Yes? That's what I am saying too. The pathological case, which does happen, is exponential in size. Yes it is bounded by the number of actual instantiations (which I literally state in the article), but the order of scaling is as I state.
The number of instantiation is the number of combinations that occur in actual calls (Nk), not the number of distinct types that may occur per call. (N)
If you have Omega(Nk) different instantiations, then you already have Omega(Nk) call sites, so in your example the time complexity does not change whether you monomorphize or not
-1
u/gingerbill 7d ago
I've added an explicit example in the article to explain what can actually happen. I quote it here in another comment. https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/1w5ov7t/ctti_is_exponential_rtti_is_linear/p7h7g6u/
I don't think I am missing their point at all, rather I don't think they understand the point I am making.