On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Roman Perepelitsa
2009/6/3 OvermindDL1
Actually, using Boost.Bind will use a lot more memory overall. Would it not be better to create a static function somewhere, something like:
class SceneManager { ... static deallocSM(SceneManage *ptr) { ptr->clearScene(); } ... };
And create as: SceneManager *s=fromSomewhere();
boost::shared_ptr<SceneManager> p(s, &SceneManager::deallocSM);
Doing this means it only keeps a pointer to the function call, instead of through a bind instantiation, meaning this will execute ever so tiny slightly faster, as well as take less space? It has been a while since I created a new handler like that, but I 'think' the function takes a pointer to the embedded pointer type, check the smart_ptr docs for details I guess.
Modern compiler's might surprise you. Always measure performance or look at generated code before resorting to manual optimizations.
Of course, but the bind will, at the very least, keep the function pointer and the pointer to the class itself, so 2*sizeof(void*), whereas the smart pointer already passes the pointer to the deallocation function, meaning there is no reason to duplicate it. In the best case you are doubling the necessary amount of used memory for that data structure.