Re: [Boost-users] Why use 'functional composition' with boost::bind

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Why use 'functional composition' with boost::bind
From: WB (w.brenig_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-08-04 15:22:54

On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 17:56:43 +0100
Mathias Gaunard <mathias.gaunard_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> You don't seem to understand what 2*_1 is. It's a lambda expression.
> You also seem to be confusing Boost.Lambda, Boost.Bind, and the
> standard function object helpers.

hmm?

http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_43_0/doc/html/lambda/s08.html#id1365369
<snip>
Basically, the Boost Bind library (BB in the sequel) implements the
bind expression part of BLL.
<snap>

and I did not experience any difference if using lambda's bind
or the original bind 

> I ran your test.
> Case 3 runs in 0.65s, case 1 and 2 in 0.82s.

> > Case 3 runs in ~1.8...1.9s, case 1 and 2 in 0.81...0.84s
> > (I compile with gcc -O3 -Wall -lstdc++, nothing special)
> 
> > Now I'm really curious what your compiler is ?

> I used g++ -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -march=native
> Ubuntu Linux, Intel Core 2 Duo.
 
Ok., so I use your 
g++ -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -march=native
SuSE Linux, Intel Core 2 Duo P9500 2.53GHz

and I get
Case 3 runs in ~1.8...1.9s, case 1 and 2 in 0.81...0.84s.
This is the same ratio I already had (at least I'm not
confused about that). So your 0.65s for case 3 is
really amazing.

wb