From: Pavel Vozenilek (pavel_vozenilek_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-02-15 14:08:21
> > "Hurd, Matthew" <hurdm_at_[hidden]> wrote
> > The numbers I got give me ~18 microseconds overhead per single
> > boost::function call (raw call takes ~404 microseconds).
> Also the 18 microseconds cost you measured, or roughly 30 microseconds
> benefit measured with my optimisation settings, can't just be put down to
> the boost::function difference I think as 18 microseconds is 36,000 cycles
> at 2 GHz and I don't think boost function could possibly cost that.
18 microseconds looks a lot to me, too.
But I think there's some low limit deduced from
RAM access speed.
My engineering guess is there are few more memory accesses
with boost::function and these will take each tens to hundreths
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk