Re: [Boost-users] Signals2 benchmark

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Signals2 benchmark
From: Nevin Liber (nevin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-02-08 20:25:34

On 7 February 2015 at 10:20, Niall Douglas <s_sourceforge_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> 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.
>

-1.

Unless you can always build everything from source (as opposed to linking
against libraries built by others), this becomes a nightmare when trying to
avoid ODR violations.
-- 
 Nevin ":-)" Liber  <mailto:nevin_at_[hidden]>  [phone]