[boost] Re: [signals] Performance

From: razeh (razeh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-01 19:22:18

Doug Gregor <dgregor_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On Mar 30, 2005, at 9:28 PM, Robert Zeh wrote:
>
>>
>> After consulting with Doug Gregor I've done some more work on signals
>> performance.  The patch I've attached removes the pImpl idiom in
>> named_slot_map and iterator_facade.
>>
>> The signals regression tests still past.
>
> Excellent, thanks!
>
> Did you happen to note the size of the test executables before and
> after, e.g. signal_test and/or signal_n_test? The original tradeoff in
> Signals was trying to favor smaller over faster, so I'm wondering if
> it was truly or a tradeoff or just bad design :)
>
> I'll take an in-depth look at the patch as soon as I find some time.
>

Here the sizes of my builds, built with -O3 and gcc 3.3.5 on my
Debian Duron system.

                    static (bytes)         dynamic (bytes)
cvs build    :      115,734                65,222
patched build:      108,465                58,623

Robert Zeh
http://home.earthlink.net/~rzeh