Subject: Re: [boost] [proto] Looong compile times and other issues
From: Eric Niebler (eric_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-12 14:39:52
On 9/12/2011 2:57 AM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
> Let me make it clear though that it is an unfair characterization
> to say that Fusion is the cause of CT slowdown for Proto.
I never said that. I'm not sure Joel F. said that either, just if IF
John is using Fusion it can add to the TMP load. But that's jumping the
gun. Let's not point fingers until we measure and figure out where the
bloat is coming from.
> First, as Eric says, Proto avoids Fusion and Second, there's a
> clear indication that a library without Proto is still faster,
> regardless of the intense CT perf tweaks done thus far.
> For example, here is the current CT status of Phoenix2 vs
> Phoenix3 comparing the elapsed (CT) time for the phoenix2 vs.
> phoenix3 lambda_tests.cpp (**):
> MSVC 10:
> Phoenix2: 00:04.5
> Phoenix3: 00:29.9
Ouch! Thomas, what can we do here?
> G++ 4.5:
> Phoenix2: 00:02.6
> Phoenix3: 00:04.7
That's more reasonable, esp. considering all the Phx3 does that Phx2
But this is drifting off-topic. Let's focus on John's problem, not the
compile-time performance of Phoenix3.
-- Eric Niebler 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