From: Gennaro Prota (gennaro_prota_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-07-31 16:54:16
On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 16:06:33 -0500 (EST), Jeremy Siek
>On Wed, 31 Jul 2002, Gennaro Prota wrote:
>gennar> Analogously, I wouldn't do something similar for the bit count.
>gennar> - reasonable approach (in my head :-)): choosing (besides the current
>gennar> one) an implementation that performs well on most boost's target
>gennar> platforms *but* giving the user the chance to provide his own
>gennar> bit-twiddled version.
>Allowing user customization in this regard is not a good idea. It will
>greatly increase the code complexity of the library, and only a miniscule
>fraction of the users will need it. If someone needs the absolute best
>performance on their platform, they can rewrite dynamic_bitset for their
>own personal use.
Yes. Of course we have to decide a strategy. My idea was to make the
customization absolutely transparent to those who don't use it, and
see if the code complexity could be reasonably limited. Do you
dissuade me from any attempt, then? :-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk