Subject: Re: [boost] Is there BOOST_ENABLE_IF macro now?
From: Matt Calabrese (rivorus_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-19 12:24:56
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Matt Calabrese <rivorus_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> The first point is only true in the old implementation -- the one in the
> sandbox ditches the function type trick entirely and just directly
> instantiates an enable_if-style template. Right now, the template used
> inherits from boost::enable_if, but that inheritance can be eliminated if
> the additional instantiation implied by the base offends you. That would
> make the amount of instantiations exactly the same as a traditional
> enable_if approach Can you elaborate on your third point? What additional
> step are you talking about and show that it actually impacts compile-time.
> It's certainly possible that this approach has a compile-time impact over
> directly using enable_if, though I've used it extensively for over a year
> and haven't noticed. I haven't made a big, brute-force test for
> compile-time performance, but from the looks of it neither have you.
I've just eliminated the additional instantiations and committed the
changes. If you want to test compile-time performance, do it based on that.
Instantiations should be minimal now unless I missed something.
-- -Matt Calabrese
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk