Re: [boost] Smart pointer status, directions, thoughts

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-05-24 15:34:50

At 08:31 PM 5/23/2001, Larry Evans wrote:

 >The gc_sel_ssp.doc file which I've just uploaded has a comparison
 >of some existing  boost gc methods.

Very interesting...  Thanks!

Some initial impressions on ways to improve the documents:

*  It would be helpful to use fuller names to identify the methods.  A name 
like "jrg_gc" should get expanded to "John's really good garbage 
collector"  or whatever it stands for.

*  The "Comparisons" might be renamed "Analysis" as it seems that would be 
a more accurate description.

*  A "Comparison" table, perhaps with methods as columns and distilled 
analysis points as rows would make actual comparisons between methods a lot 
easier.

*  For the memory usage analysis, it would be useful to pick one or two 
typical graphs, and compute the actual memory size used (making some 
typical assumptions about sizeof pointers, longs, etc).  While the basis 
has to be your detailed analysis, actual numbers are a lot easier to 
compare.

*  I'm not sure if it is possible to do something similar for timings, but 
it would be useful to know somehow the relative speeds in typical 
small/medium/large uses (if there is such a thing).

Anyhow, this is really interesting stuff and I hope others will take a look 
at your work and make comments.

--Beman