Re: [boost] [RFC] Boost library name mangling and Microsoft's'secure STL' feature.

Subject: Re: [boost] [RFC] Boost library name mangling and Microsoft's'secure STL' feature.
From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-09-04 13:56:48

Mat Marcus:

> I wouldn't say that it has *no* performance implications. Default
> settings often have large impact since many people don't take the time
> to learn the meaning of the various settings or tune them. In my
> experience, this is especially true with a complex tool like boost
> build.

Yes, you are right. The default does have performance implications for 
people who use Boost.Build for their projects. (Although I wouldn't expect 
that particular audience to not take the time to learn the settings.)

What I said applies to the "ordinary" user of Boost. He downloads Boost, 
builds or installs it, then makes use of it in his own project. In this 
case, the state of _SECURE_SCL is determined by the user. Whatever is built 
or installed by default should match what most of our "ordinary" users need, 
so that the autolink "just works". (Or we could just build both.)