Re: [boost] Re: Re: Profiling Library suggestion

From: christopher diggins (cdiggins_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-15 13:15:51

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rob Stewart" <stewart_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Cc: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 4:12 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] Re: Re: Profiling Library suggestion

> From: christopher diggins <cdiggins_at_[hidden]>
>> From: "Preston A. Elder" <prez_at_[hidden]>
>>
>> > First, that the policy stuff is all static.  This makes it impossible 
>> > for
>> > me to have two or more individual profilers going, using the same 
>> > policy,
>> > but, say, a different output file, without making the policy extremely
>> > complex and doing all kinds of string matching to sort out whats what.
>>
>> How would you propose doing it differently?
>
> I think he is referring to the approach of deriving from the
> policies such that they can have non-static data members.  This
> also means that you would typically call the policy member
> functions without qualifying them with the policy class name.

What do you think of the idea of passing of pointers to profile_manager 
variables to the profilers?

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