Re: [boost] Boost.MPI accepted

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-22 19:20:46

"Felipe Magno de Almeida" <felipe.m.almeida_at_[hidden]> writes:

> On 9/22/06, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> [snipped]
>
>> Using Boost.Parameter is not the same sort of thing; it comes with
>> Boost and is transparent to build/configuration issues.  I'm not
>> saying what you're suggesting is a bad idea; I just don't see what
>> great advantage it offers.
>
> Faster compile time?
> Boost.Parameter uses a great deal of metaprogramming, and I used a
> little here in a project of mine. It really makes the interface
> better, but the compile times grow a lot. 

Really?  By how much?  and on what compiler?  I would very much
appreciate seeing numbers.

Are you using the latest Boost.Parameter macros to enable your
functions, or are you making lots of use of the old idioms?
Extensive use of binding<>, especially, is likely to make it expensive
at compile-time.

> IMO, they are worth, but I doubt everybody would agree.

Let's have some numbers; if they are very bad I'll be convinced (but
also highly motivated to optimize the library).

-- 
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com