Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #13615: Could the performance of spirit::qi::parse() be much worse than std::stod()?

Subject: Re: [Boost-bugs] [Boost C++ Libraries] #13615: Could the performance of spirit::qi::parse() be much worse than std::stod()?
From: Boost C++ Libraries (noreply_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-06-25 10:59:59

#13615: Could the performance of spirit::qi::parse() be much worse than
std::stod()?
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
  Reporter:  Mario Emmenlauer        |      Owner:  Joel de Guzman
  <mario@…>                          |
      Type:  Bugs                    |     Status:  new
 Milestone:  To Be Determined        |  Component:  spirit
   Version:  Boost 1.67.0            |   Severity:  Optimization
Resolution:                          |   Keywords:  parser, stod, string,
                                     |  double, performance
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Comment (by Mario Emmenlauer <mario@…>):

 Please close this ticket as invalid.

 I was running the benchmark as part of testing. And testing uses a debug
 build. When switching the benchmark to release mode, boost::spirit::qi is
 the fastest parser of the parsers that perform error checking. Only atof()
 can be faster sometimes, but since it does not give any guarantee about
 correctenss, I do not include it in the valid results. Thanks for the nice
 library!

-- 
Ticket URL: <https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/13615#comment:1>
Boost C++ Libraries <http://www.boost.org/>
Boost provides free peer-reviewed portable C++ source libraries.