Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-23 09:37:01

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

> On 9/22/06, David Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>> 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.
> Oh, there were changes?


> No, no, I dont think I was using any macros.
> But I was using only named templated parameters. I really dont know
> how it compares.
>> > 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).
> I dont have hard data. But a three classes library, using only named
> template parameters (four each) and instantiated three times was
> taking roughly 30 seconds to compile. VC7.1 on a AMD 64 X2 3800+

That means nothing until we know how much of that time was due to the
use of the parameter library.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at