Re: [boost] Phoenix Reloaded

Subject: Re: [boost] Phoenix Reloaded
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-05-30 20:47:22

Eric Niebler wrote:
> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>> First of all, thanks for kick-starting the development, Eric!
> 
> Thanks for writing Phoenix in the first place!
> 
>> I looked at the prototype and it looks good. Reading the replies
>> to this post, I'd not worry about compile time too much at this
>> point but at least have a keen eye on it. I'd want to concentrate
>> more on the extension mechanism and its interface.
> <snip>
> 
> I think we have to make compile-time performance a priority -- and it 
> may influence the extensibility API. If we bill this as Lambda-2 and it 
> causes noticeable compile lag over Lambda-1, folks will be rightly 
> disappointed.

Ok, that makes sense. Let's hope we don't have a clash of priorities
though. I, for one, would value elegance of the API over compile time
performance. To me, it's pretty much a given that we can never
equal Lambda nor Phoenix-2's CT performance: there will be a noticeable 
CT lag. I wish I am wrong.

> Frankly, I wish I had the template profiler before I settled on Proto's 
> extensibility API because I might have done things differently.
> 
>> At this point, I'd say that the design of the extension API is of
>> most crucial significance. I'll have some feedback on this as soon
>> as I learn more about the initial prototype. Those who have seen
>> or used my other libraries' extension interfaces (Dan, Hartmut, etc.)
>> please feel free to chime in.
> 
> Yes, please.
> 

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boostpro.com
http://spirit.sf.net