From: Greg Comeau (comeau_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-06 14:03:29
In article <000f01c2251b$d61f85d0$7772e50c_at_c161550a>,
Paul Mensonides <boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>Right now, we are having to provide pre-expanded files to include if
>the preprocessor is from EDG.
Yes, I noted this too, but forget to include it in my earlier post.
I'm also curious for the full path of an article that Dave A wrote
about a year ago about compile speeds.
>Peprocessing in non-strict mode (on Win32) can be significantly
>faster (though not *fast*) than preprocessing in strict mode.
>Why is this and what is the difference?
Nothing off hand leaps out at me. Permit me to ask some
1) You're talking about the difference in como -E'ing it?
2) How are you timing this?
3) When you say "non-strict mode (on Win32)" are you talking
about general non-strict "relaxed" mode, or "microsoft" mode?
4) How "significant" is "significantly"? :) IOWs, can you give
a timing example just to gain your perspective?
I'm sure you guys have this right, but I'm trying to understand
the details of it.
-- Greg Comeau 4.3.0 NEWS: New Windows Backends + 'export' IN July! Comeau C/C++ ONLINE ==> http://www.comeaucomputing.com/tryitout World Class Compilers: Breathtaking C++, Amazing C99, Fabulous C90. Comeau C/C++ with Dinkumware's Libraries... Have you tried it?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk