Re: [boost] [proto] Looong compile times and other issues

Subject: Re: [boost] [proto] Looong compile times and other issues
From: Joel Falcou (joel.falcou_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-09-13 05:22:23

On 13/09/2011 04:08, Joel de Guzman wrote:
> Sorry about that. I was just reacting to Joel F's note saying
> "- fusion is also a big hitter" in a thread titled "[proto]
> Looong compile times and other issues". I was just defending
> Fusion with clear proof that the overhead is not due to Fusion
> and that proof happens to come from Phoenix2 which uses Fusion
> exclusively.
>
> I agree. Let's not point fingers. I would've expected Joel F to
> substantiate any claims like that with real numbers, lest it
> starts to sound more like spreading FUD.
>
> Regards,

Shortcut are to be blamed, qs Eric said, I was pointign out that, in 
some case, the cocktail fusion in proto transform leads to surprising CT 
and that, before seeign John code, it *may* be the case. I am using 
Fusion et al. for like eveyrthign, I start to know when and how stuff an 
get wrong, i wont take on me to spread FUDs on this subject.