From: Andy Little (andy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-06 21:56:30
"David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> "Andy Little" <andy_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> So all in all I reckon Boost.Fusion is quite cool :-). Of course it is
>> not as good performance wise,
> I don't know why you say "of course." Just as STL iteration can be
> faster than a hand-coded loop, in MPL we did several things that can
> make it quite a bit faster to use the high-level abstractions than to
> do the naive hand-coded version. The same thing could be true of Fusion.
Dunno, but there are two things, firstly references, aka pointers, and secondly
iterators aka pointers. That said, the runtime performance issue is secondary.
like me I think it needs a whole lot of useage examples, so I can copy paste
them. Anyway, for my 'Quan'tity matrices, its seems to hit the spot :-)
>> but I am not too concerned about performance and
> A welcome change ;-)
Let's separate compile time performance from runtime performance.
>> it is more interesting to do it this way..
> And more maintainable. And more understandable. And... :)
Boost.Fusion certainly has got something ... not quite sure what yet ;-)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk