[boost] Re: [function] timing trivia

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
of nanoseconds.

/Pavel