Boost Users :
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [signals2][review] The review of the signals2 library (formerly thread_safe_signals) begins today, Nov 1st
From: Frank Mori Hess (fmhess_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-11-19 19:11:25
On Wednesday 19 November 2008 16:59, Hansi wrote:
> I have made a few tests with the library. I think the library is good,
> but I don't know if I make something wrong, but it seems for me that the
> library is slow. I have made a few tests with VC++ 8.0 and _SCL_SECURE=0
> and it seems that it is about 50 times slower than a normal
> boost::function with a bind.... It's a lot...
I distilled your benchmark down to something minimal I could compile under
Linux (attached) and I get:
when compiling with gcc with -O3. So, I'm getting a factor of 9. The
original Boost.Signals doesn't do any better in this particular benchmark.
One odd thing I noticed is the signals2 benchmark actually runs slower (2.8
sec) if I define NDEBUG!
Boost-users list run by williamkempf at hotmail.com, kalb at libertysoft.com, bjorn.karlsson at readsoft.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, wekempf at cox.net