From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-28 20:38:02
Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger_at_[hidden]> writes:
> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Tobias Schwinger <tschwinger_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>>- use at_c for every element
>> Not at all; just use iterators dereference and increment them.
>> boost/python/detail/caller.hpp uses this pattern.
> Well, that's nicer in case 'at' has non-constant complexity. Still, I
> find this "surprisingly brutal".
I don't see why. How would you fill up members of a struct with
successive elements of a sequence?
x.m1 = *i;
x.m2 = *i;
x.m3 = *i;
Yes, we have shorthands like *++i, but it amounts to the same thing.
> Can you give me a vague idea of this technique's performance
> (seconds/functions), if recognizable at all ?
I have no data other than that it's "fast enough."
>> This is going to be a job for the PP library, no matter what you do.
> Oh! Use it already. My concern was about the preprocessed code (becomes
> huge, causes numerous template instantiations when used and in some way
> obscures the preprocessed headers).
Sounds pretty FUDdy, duddy.
> However, if it works for Boost.Python I'll call it "common practice" and
> just use it ;-).
Hope I helped.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk