Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [program_options]
From: Vladimir Prus (ghost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-07 12:10:20

Andrey Semashev wrote:
> On 03/06/2010 10:03 PM, Phil Richards wrote:
>> My point was that there is no need for having both overloads: it doesn't
>> (as far as I can see) provide any benefit having an "efficient" const
>> char* call - there isn't any (obvious) extra conversions or code bloat
>> by providing just the const std::string& interface because internally
>> the const char* are immediately converted to std::string.
>> But, as I said before, I might be missing something.
> I didn't analyze the code deeply but the code bloat may take place
> because the function gets called from user's code multiple times. This
> means that the literal -> string conversion is generated many times in
> user's code instead of being generated once in the compiled binary of
> Boost.ProgramOptions. Again, I didn't ensure that is the case.

This is indeed the case.

- Volodya

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