Subject: Re: [boost] [MPL][vector] Is there interest in mpl::vector using variadic templates?
From: Larry Evans (cppljevans_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-02 17:54:27
On 03/02/2017 11:27 AM, Peter Dimov via Boost wrote:
> Larry Evans wrote:
>> One problem with the above cppljevans mpl is there's no at.hpp.
>> Instead, the non-variadic boost/mpl/at.hpp was used.
>> The reason no variadic at was created was because, AFAICT, there was
>> no non-recursive method for picking the I-th element from T... , and,
>> IIUC, recursive templates cause compile-time slow downs.
> Have you read
Nope. Thanks *very much* for the link. I'm impressed (especially
with the way you actually cited the parts of the standard to guide
your search for the best method!).
> Search for mp_at.
Thanks for that tip.
I'm a bit surprised that the mp_map_from_list was fastest.
I would have thought that large template classes mean slow
compile times, but I guess not.
Thanks again, Peter.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk