Re: __gnu_cxx::hash_set efficient union

hi all,

as part of an 'implicitly statically typed Python' to C++ compiler
called Shedskin I'm working on (http://mark.dufour.googlepages.com),
I'm using __gnu_cxx::hash_set to implement Python sets. unfortunately
I can't get the performance to quite match that of set. for example,
this is how I thought set union would be reasonably fast:

template<class T> set<T> *set<T>::_union(set<T> *s) {
    set<T> *c = new set<T>();
    c->units = units;

    it2 = s->units.end();
    for(it1 = s->units.begin(); it1 != it2; it1++)
        c->units.insert(*it1);

    return c;
}

(some context:

units is of type __gnu_cxx::hash_set<T, hashfunc<T>, hasheq<T>,
gc_allocator<T> > // Boehm GC

template<class T> class hashfunc
{
    public: int operator()(T t) const { return hasher<T>(t); }
};

template<> int hasher(int a) { return a; }

template<class T> class hasheq {
    public: int operator()(T t, T v) const { return __eq(t,v); }
};

template<> int __eq(int a, int b) { return a == b; }
)

..but for a simple union of two large sets of ints, this approach is
about three times slower than under the Python interpreter. just
copying the left argument (c->units = units;) is slower than the
complete union in Python..

am I doing something really silly here, or is hash_set just not that
efficient? perhaps the new unordered_set will be much more
performant..? (btw, will unordered_set have union etc. members?)

here is a link to the blog posting that triggered this, with some
Python code that becomes much slower after compilation:
http://pyinsci.blogspot.com/2007/08/set-implementation-performance.html

any help is much appreciated! suggestions on how to improve
performance of the implementations for the other Python builtins are
also very much welcome.