Re: [boost] Re: lightweight replacement for boost::function

From: John Torjo (john.lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-18 13:26:27

Thorsten Ottosen wrote:

> "John Torjo" <john.lists_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:4123762F.5060101_at_torjo.com...
> | Dear boosters,
> |
> | Did a lightweight replacement for boost::function (compile-wise). Focus
> | was on making it very fast to compile.
> 
> Have you tested normal code on a compiler with precompiled headers? I can include seriously
> large headers faster than compiling simple code again.

Yes, I know about precompiled headers. It's just that I can't assume 
everyone using win32gui will use them. That's the problem ;)

Which brings me to another question: does gcc support precompiled headers?

> 
> I have long been wanting to use <boost/std.hpp> <boost/boost.hpp>.

True ;)

Best,
John

-- 
John Torjo
Freelancer
-- john_at_[hidden]
Contributing editor, C/C++ Users Journal
-- "Win32 GUI Generics" -- generics & GUI do mix, after all
-- http://www.torjo.com/win32gui/
-- v1.3beta released - check out splitter/simple_viewer,
    a File Explorer/Viewer all in about 200 lines of code!
Professional Logging Solution for FREE
-- http://www.torjo.com/code/logging.zip (logging           - C++)
-- http://www.torjo.com/logview/         (viewing/filtering - Win32)
-- http://www.torjo.com/logbreak/        (debugging         - Win32)