Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-11 09:41:17

From: "Lars Gullik Bjønnes" <larsbj_at_[hidden]>

> When testing this and the prev. version with gcc, I get a 2:3
> perfomance difference in favour of the traditional solution.
> Gcc 3.1 -O3
> ./postincr
> Number1: 6650000
> Number2: 9900000

That's not surprising. What happens when you try the version that actually
returns the postfix_incrementer<number> instead of the number?

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at