Subject: Re: [boost] [uuids] On boost::uuids::uuid operator == performance.
From: Mathias Gaunard (mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-17 15:48:34
On 17/04/12 12:52, Michael Kochetkov wrote:
> Anyway the real problems are that
> 1. boost's implementation of uuid is at least weird in terms there are much
> better approaches that cost nothing in implementation but are ignored.
Comparing 16 bytes is hardly the important part in a UUID library.
Boost.UUID is using the correct construct for this, it is sad some
compilers cannot optimize it properly, but it's still the ideal solution
from a C++ point of view.
The approach you suggest is not well-formed C++ and is specific to your
particular configuration; it might fare worst on others.
So it's not really "better" nor does it "cost nothing".
An option is to simply fix the problem in your local copy of Boost.
That being said, I'm sure the library author will consider fixing it if
you file a bug for it.
> 2. the investigation of opinions of boost people (I have made another
> inquiry in "[boost] [function] The cost of boost::function" thread)
boost::function is heavyweight and has significant costs. If you don't
need the features boost::function provides, simply don't use it and
avoid the costs associated with it.
The same thing can be said about any feature in C++.
> that boost still is not ready for production usage.
You realize Boost has been used in many production environments, some
very high-profile, for more than a decade now?
> It requires too high
> qualification of the real life programmers to be able to slalom in dark
> corners of boost and C++ itself so it puts the success of a project at high
> risk. And I have some real life examples (you do not think I study the cases
> with the debugger on purpose, do you? :) )
This is understandable. Using any external library is a risk to take.
> 3. The words on the top of the boost.org page ""...one of the most highly
> regarded and expertly designed C++ library projects in the world." - Herb
> Sutter and Andrei Alexandrescu, C++ Coding Standards" really need some
Those are citations from well-known people in the C++ community. They
themselves are grounds.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk