Re: [boost] Interest for a perl6-like-junctions-class?

From: FlSt_at_[hidden]
Date: 2005-08-06 06:19:19

Rob Stewart wrote:

>From: FlSt_at_[hidden]
>  
>
>>Furthermore I uploaded a new implementation of my junctions calss to the 
>>sanbox file vault junction/boost_junction_v8.zip and a draft of a 
>>document which describes the junctions from a mathematical view. (It's 
>>just a draft and the notation needs to be explained)
>>Lambda is removed from the current version, because to many compilers 
>>don't compile this. I'm using boost::bind instead to change the operands 
>>order.
>>    
>>
>
>I just tried that version tonight.  So far, it has taken well
>over 30 minutes to compile junction_example.cpp, and it's still
>going.  That's on a 3 GHz dual Pentium box running SUSE linux
>using GCC 3.2.3.  By comparison, my test program with my library
>takes less than a minute.
>
On my Pentium III 900Mhz (512 MB) (I know this machine is outdated like 
my gcc 2.95)  it takes 15Minutes with g++ 4.0.1 and the compilation 
never finished with g++ 3.3.6 and 2.95.?, because my virtual memory was 
full ;-). I uploaded a new version to the sandbox file vault 
(junctions/boost_junction_v9.zip). This version compiles a little bit 
faster, but it's still slow. I don't know exactly why, but I think this 
has todo with the many operator template instances are generated with my 
test program. I removed the xxx_of functions for STL-Iterators, because 
Ranges of STL-Iterators can be generated with make_iterator_range( 
begin, end ).

>I'll try rewriting my test program to work with your library so
>we can compare them a little more fairly.  I'll let you know what
>I find.
>
Good idea.

Sincerly
  Florian