From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-08-21 08:52:41
"John Torjo" <john.lists_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> I am a bit surprised that Boosters themselves do not seem to want to
>> one of their own key libraries. Maybe because I am used to the C++
>> callback and event systems invented by Microsoft and Borland for their
>> frameworks, anything less or more restricted seems primitive to me. That
> I have to disagree with you. It's quite an overhead to use boost::function.
> In the SMART_ASSERT library I'm developing, the first version used
> boost::function - compile-time were huge.
> Step by step I removed different things (amongst which the boost::function),
> and now I can live with the current compilation time.
Maybe we should be looking for ways to reduce the compilation times
for Boost.Function. Opinions, Doug?
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk