Re: [boost] Re: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: is_class

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-17 08:34:24

Daniel Frey <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> 
>> Daniel Frey <daniel.frey_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> 
>> > And finally, if I got you right, it might
>> > also be useful to use my is_class-version to add it even if we have 3
>> > versions in is_class then. I guess that the "older EDG-versions" you
>> > refer to are really slow when having to instantiate all the dependecies
>> > of is_class's workaround, right?
>> 
>> Probably not noticeably slow to instantiate that one template, but
>> most EDG compilers (except the very latest) have abysmally slow
>> template instantiation speed, and these things do add up.
>
> Yeah, especially given the increasingly recursive use of templates. I
> think no one imagined that when the compilers were developed. Thus we
> should check if older versions of EDG-based compilers like the code
> provided. Do you have some compilers in mind that are likely to benefit
> noticably?

I think even Intel 7 is using the old front-end, but Intel 6
certainly.  I don't know whether you'll _notice_ a difference, though.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com