Boost Users :

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [Signals2] Signal memory overhead
From: Sean Buckheister (s_buckhe_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-03-21 11:19:25

Next message: Mark Christiaens: "[Boost-users] Boost ASIO cancelling jobs from another thread"
Previous message: Igor R: "Re: [Boost-users] use of boost::noncopyable ?"
In reply to: Norbert Wenzel: "Re: [Boost-users] [Signals2] Signal memory overhead"
Next in thread: Sean Buckheister: "Re: [Boost-users] [Signals2] Signal memory overhead"

> So if that is the case, you might as well use Signals1 instead of 2, if
> you don't need any synchronization and are concerned about the overhead.

I've measured Signals (without 2) as well, it's even worse. Don't ask me
how or why, I don't understand it either.

Next message: Mark Christiaens: "[Boost-users] Boost ASIO cancelling jobs from another thread"
Previous message: Igor R: "Re: [Boost-users] use of boost::noncopyable ?"
In reply to: Norbert Wenzel: "Re: [Boost-users] [Signals2] Signal memory overhead"
Next in thread: Sean Buckheister: "Re: [Boost-users] [Signals2] Signal memory overhead"

Date view	Thread view	Subject view	Author view

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