From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-16 16:54:41
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> As eplained in
> boost::any is not exactly optimal w.r.t. efficiency. Diggins
> implementation avoid allocation for objects smaller or equal to
> sizeof(void*). Personally I think this is too small a buffer;
> Boost.Function uses at least two words; I think it might be worth to
> go for 3 words.
> Would anyone be interested in implementing this?
I think this would be a good idea as long as swap is
a) correct (the version listed in the article isn't)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk