Re: [boost] Re: Profiling Library suggestion

From: christopher diggins (cdiggins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-05 16:22:38

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Braatz" <brianb_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 8:05 PM
Subject: RE: [boost] Re: Profiling Library suggestion

> [Brian Braatz]
> That is a good idea (use a AOP style weave).
>
> It begs asking here- when we talk about profiling, what are the use
> cases you guys see.
>
> I have some stuff to implement profiling on in the coming weeks. My
> situations are as follows:
>
> * Profile and log the profiling results of my unit tests between the
> checkpoints
> -> Either explicitly or I may redefine BOOST_CHECKPOINT

The profiler that I am proposing would only measure a code block. This 
restriction is not too burdensome for my purposes, but I can not speak as to 
other people's unit tests. What is your view on this, generally and w.r.t to 
your current specific usage case?

> * Profile an application for when makes certain method calls on some COM
> objects- Also log this information.
> -> Problem is, folks have coded directly to the COM objects proxy
> class. Because of this, the AOP style typedef trick will not work unless
> I push the proxy classes into a namespace- and redefine them in the
> global namespace with a weave in place. (structurally this might be more
> work than I want to deal with)
>
> * profiling specific operations which cross cut many areas of the system
> and only doing that when certain dynamic conditions exist

This can be done I believe with a customized profiler policy.

> I am asking you guys for how you need to use profiling because by
> talking aobut the problem that is to be solved, it might make the
> discussion of what the solution is easier to address.

Thanks for bringing these use cases to our attention.

Christopher Diggins
Object Oriented Template Library (OOTL)
http://www.ootl.org