Re: [Boost-users] large variant performance compared (50 elements)

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] large variant performance compared (50 elements)
From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-01-09 20:28:57

On 1/10/2011 12:29 AM, Steven Watanabe wrote:
> AMDG
>
> On 1/9/2011 6:03 AM, Mathias Gaunard wrote:
>> Writing a variant replacement is actually quite easy, and doing so would greatly reduce
>> your compile times.
>> Variant is old, full of quirks, and doesn't scale well. Why it even requires its MPL
>> input sequence to be Front Extensible (which it doesn't even state in its documentation)
>> is beyond me. This is a very annoying limitation that makes it impractical to use with a
>> large amount of types, since compatibility with joint_view would be very nice in that
>> situation.
>
> So, why not fix Boost.Variant instead of having
> everyone roll his own?

Agreed 100%. Someone should do a full upgrade for Boost.variant. We use it
a lot and its quirks are somewhat annoying (e.g. I had to write my own
as_variant from Fusion sequences because of the Front Extensible requirement).
A more efficient upgrade would be very welcome!

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boostpro.com
http://spirit.sf.net