Boost Users :
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Signals2 benchmark
From: Niall Douglas (s_sourceforge_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-02-07 11:20:00
On 7 Feb 2015 at 3:12, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote:
> > But comparing thread-safe implementations with implementations that
> > are not thread-safe seems a bit unfair to me.
> Is it reallistic that folks would want a variant of signals that's not
> threadsafe, trading some callback restrictions for performance?
I think a version which is compile time switchable is the ideal.
However, a non-thread safe implementation isn't particularly
interesting. It's easy to achieve high performance if you have a
giant mutex wrapping everything.
-- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
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