On Sat, Oct 22, 2005 at 06:52:03PM -0400, Oliver Schoenborn wrote:
Basically (as of boost 1.32), coutf is less than 10% slower than explicitely calling operator<< and manipulators, whereas boost.format is 70% slower. As with any benchmarking, it depends on how you use the stuff, I'm sure there are cases where the numbers are reversed, but the benchmarking I did is for what I perceive as "typical" use cases. See the web page.
I'm most interested in the compile-time performance. coutf is ~ 1/3 as many lines as format (as informally counted with wc -l) and it clearly requires far fewer template instantiations. So it looks good... reason for the curiosity is I once changed all the printfs (which were used to format messages that were then forwarded to a logger) in a fairly large project to boost::format and the compile time for the project tripled (this was with an old gcc, boost 1.32). -t