[boost] Re: FSM review

From: Jonathan Turkanis (technews_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-20 15:53:14

Andreas Huber wrote:
> Jonathan Turkanis wrote:
>> Andreas Huber wrote:

>>> That's interesting. I was under the impression that exactly such a
>>> list of alternate implementation techniques would not satisfy you,
>>> because it would in no way show that the design I chose is the best
>>> performance-wise.
>>
>> Why not? That would be the main point.
>
> I don't understand. A list of alternate techniques would show that
> none of these techniques satisfies the requirements but it doesn't say
> anything why the current FSM implementation performs worse than any of
> these techniques.

You don't just list the techniques. You explain them and summarize their
performance characteristics.

Jonathan