Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] Third release is ready, requesting preliminary review
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-02 12:56:41
----- Original Message -----
From: "DE" <satan66613_at_[hidden]>
To: "vicente.botet" <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 6:42 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] Third release is ready,requesting preliminary review
> on 02.05.2010 at 20:05
> vicente.botet wrote :
>> On the documentation you say " Some of these numbers can get huge,
>> making copying an expensive proposition, and even move semantics (at
>> least as emulated by Boost.Move at the time of this writing) aren't as fast"
>> Why do you say on Boost.Move is not as fast as COW?
> can i reply? please can i? can i?
YES, YOU CAN :)
> for example if you make 10 copies of an object
> cow (or implict sharing) aware objects will share only one
> representation among all instances, i.e. there is only one allocation,
> initialization and no copy processes at all
> in this circumstances move enabled objects would not act as efficient
> supposing none of that ten copies are temporary you get ten "deep"
> copies of the first object
> this involves ten allocations, initializations and costs associated
> with them
> so in some circumstances implicit sharing (or cow) will always be
> faster even if move semantics is implemented otherwise
Oh, I see. I was thinking on returning integer types from functions.