Re: [boost] [phoenix] request for a mini-review. (Re: Phoenix as a Boost library)

Subject: Re: [boost] [phoenix] request for a mini-review. (Re: Phoenix as a Boost library)
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-10-17 07:17:08

On 17/10/2010 06:01, Joel de Guzman wrote:

> Yeah, that's what we do for 03. Let's call it less-than-perfect forwarding.
> It's the best we can do. Right now we have a PP constant for that. Mind
> you,
> even 3 args is still quite expensive!

What's expensive? The generation of all these overloads with the 
preprocessor or the actual lookup with that many overloads?

If it's the former, I don't think that's very relevant. If you want to 
use a tool like Phoenix, you probably should use a PCH version of it.

As a side note, more and more Boost libraries are making compilation 
very slow, and it would be nice to integrate standardized PCH headers as 
part of the Boost distribution, which would be automatically generated 
at installation time.