Subject: Re: [boost] [interfaces] Boost Interface Library (2004?)
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-18 12:35:10
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:03 PM, Daniel Larimer <dlarimer_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I do not like the boost::function problems either, it was more of a notional. There is always this(http://www.codeproject.com/KB/cpp/fastdelegate2.aspx) drop in replacement for boost::function.
The article's analysis is wrong. From the beginning Boost.Function
used the "small object optimization" to avoid an "expensive heap
memory allocation that [would be] required to store the member
function and the bound object on which member function call is made"
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk