Boost logo

Boost Users :

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Why use 'functional composition' with boost::bind
From: WB (w.brenig_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-08-03 14:27:12

> Wolfram Brenig wrote:
> > -----------------------
> > Now, my question is, if such nested construction of functors
> > at the call site, which is suggested also in the 'Bind Summary'
> > in Karlsson's book, will actually lead to code which has no
> > relevant performance loss as compared to 'old-style' for-loops?
> > <snip>
> > bind(multiplies<double>(),bind(sin,_1),bind(sin,_1)),
> > bind(multiplies<double>(),bind(cos,_1),bind(cos,_1))
> >
> These calls to sin and cos are through function pointers.
> In Christ,
> Steven Watanabe


Even if boost::bind does so in this expression, what should I
conclude from that in the context of my question? Does this
already make up for the performance difference?
Can you suggest a different nested bind at the call site for this
example which performs similar to old-style for-loops (and
please: by code not by casuistry)


Boost-users list run by williamkempf at, kalb at, bjorn.karlsson at, gregod at, wekempf at