Subject: Re: [boost] [variant] address of a variant type from the address ofitssub-object?
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-04-14 07:53:50
Andrzej Krzemienski wrote:
> But, I am trying to optimize a function that I believe is slower than
> ideal, and my hypothesis is that this carrying of the additional pointer
> around is the culprit.
That's hard to believe. Copying a pointer should be insignificant compared
to the cost of the dispatch. What does the profiler say?
You should probably spell out the apply_visitor() call by hand inline; in
addition to eliminating the pointer copy, this would allow you to experiment
with, say, reordering the tests from most frequent to least frequent.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk