Subject: Re: [boost] Should Boost adopt pimpl/d-pointer as much as it can?
From: Josh Faust (jfaust_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-03-23 17:10:43
> Did you try precompiling header files?
I didn't -- I've only ever used pch with msvc so I didn't think to try it.
> My results are:
> inclusion 2,6 s (-02+link)
> precompilation 1,45 s (-02+link)
> diff *1.8*
1.45 seconds is still a large amount of time to add for inclusion of a
single mutex header.
As a concrete example, including mutex.hpp pulls in 50 date_time headers
even if I'm not going to use timed_mutex. If timed_mutex were implemented
in a cpp file, system_time could be forward-declared. The locks also don't
look like they need the definition of system_time.
I'll have to do some experimentation with this stuff and submit a patch if I
can get compile times down. I don't want to derail this thread into
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk