Subject: Re: [boost] [function] function wrapping with noexceptionsafetyguarantee
From: Daniel Walker (daniel.j.walker_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-11-11 14:14:06
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 7:19 PM, Kazutoshi Satoda
> Domagoj Saric wrote:
>> this 'overhead' of a few static pointers is completely insignificant
>> compared to various related code bloat issues...
> That should be true. But unfortunately, the overhead of static pointers
> are actually significant while they are not const, at least for me.
Thanks for following up on this. I looked into it and this seems like
a good idea to me. I attached a patch to your ticket.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk