Re: [Boost-users] boost programmer_option.hpp

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] boost programmer_option.hpp
From: Narendra R (zan.boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-07-14 05:28:47

>
> Thx ravi,

           I got to know and it working.
          I was not knowing that -l is for searching the lib object -L for
lib path or for linking object.
Thanks one again

>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:03:20 -0400
> From: Ravi <lists_ravi_at_[hidden]>
> Subject: Re: [Boost-users] boost programmer_option.hpp
> To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
> Message-ID: <200907111103.20188.lists_ravi_at_[hidden]>
> Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="iso-8859-15"
>
> On Friday 10 July 2009 01:28:44 Narendra R wrote:
> > I tried to link like this
> >  g++ -I /home/narendra/boost_instal/boost_1_39_0 test.cpp -o test -L
> > /home/narendra/boost_instal/boost_1_39_0/stage/lib
> >
> -l/home/narendra/boost_instal/boost_1_39_0/stage/lib/libboost_program_optio
> >ns-gcc41-mt-1_39.a
>
> The '-l' is not required when explicitly specifying the whole library. So,
> you
> would use one of the following. Replace $INS with
> /home/narendra/boost_instal/boost_1_39_0 in the code below.
>
> Option 1:
>
> g++ -I$INS test.cpp -o test $INS/libboost_program_options-gcc41-mt-1_39.a
>
> Option 2:
>
> g++ -I$INS test.cpp -o test -L $INS/stage/lib
> -lboost_program_options-gcc41-
> mt-1_39
>
> In option 2, depending on whether you use static linking or dynamic
> linking,
> you may want to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH before running the example.
>
> Regards,
> Ravi
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:08:52 -0400
> From: Ravi <lists_ravi_at_[hidden]>
> Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Boost Python is slow?
> To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
> Message-ID: <200907111108.52321.lists_ravi_at_[hidden]>
> Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Thursday 09 July 2009 05:00:47 Tyomich on the AIR wrote:
> > And then when I use a simple function which just increments the x member
> of
> > every object, this function takes about 4 seconds to process the whole
> list
> > (1000000 items) of Boost-wrapped objects and less than a second to
> process
> > objects of my own wrapping! How this can be possible? Is Boost.Python
> much
> > more slower than Python itself?
>
> Boost.Python is a little slower than wrapping directly using Python C-API,
> especially in very simple cases like yours. (It is a variant of the
> abstraction penalty.) However, it is hard to believe that it is 4x slower.
> Would you mind posting complete compilable examples so that we can take a
> look
> at it?
>
> Regards,
> Ravi
>
>
>