Re: [boost] Should Boost adopt pimpl/d-pointer as much as it can?

Subject: Re: [boost] Should Boost adopt pimpl/d-pointer as much as it can?
From: Artyom (artyomtnk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-22 01:36:25

> I believe asio is header-only because the author finds that
> more practical to use and deploy.
> 
> It is him you should try to convince otherwise.
> 

It is not just ASIO, but many other libraries.

> 
> > Result (liked executable size with gcc-4.3):
> >
> > Build   Size (-Os stripped)
> > Asio:   245K
> > Pimpl:  190K
> 
> Could you try this while whole program optimization (gcc
> 4.5+) turned on and tell me whether there is still a
> difference?
> 

1. I do turned on full optimization (for size -Os),
2. 4.3 is quite latest and I don't have access to 4.5 (it is not even
   released yet...)
3. The issue is not compiler but maybe linker itself.

What happens:

Each sample server I compiled implemented its own "select loop", wait
queue, even dispatcher, mutexes etc, etc.

Each module compiles independently, it does not know if there is another
module which implements same routines -- so there is lots of work for 
linker to find shared routines and merge them. I'm even not sure that
according to standard it suppose to do such things.

Artyom