Subject: Re: [boost] [Fit] Louis Dionne's formal review
From: Louis Dionne (ldionne.2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-03-12 16:38:01
Paul Fultz II <pfultz2 <at> yahoo.com> writes:
> Thanks Louis for the review. Do you have any feedback/thoughts about the
> compile-time performance of the library?
It's hard to tell without doing benchmarks, which I didn't do. Things I might
suggest benchmarking would be creating large `fit::pack`s and `fit::capture`s,
using `compress` with many arguments and using `fit::arg` with many arguments.
Just looking at the implementation quickly, it seems OK. For example `pack`
does not use a recursive implementation and all the functions I looked at
used flat variadic expansion whenever possible instead of recursion.
The C++11/14 way, basically. However, `detail::seq` is implemented using
recursion. It's not dramatic, but you could use a logarithmic approach
instead to avoid hitting template instantiation depth limits.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk