Re: [Boost-users] Container iteration macro that is equivalent to handcoded iteration?

No we do not. The compiler does not need to know the contents of f to generate that code. Neither do we need to know the contents of f to discuss the code that the compiler generates in this case. I deliberately left f undefined so that loop efficiency can be studied in isolation.

If you don't write something the compiler could inline,I wouldn't worry about things that are on the order of a subroutine call. If you put something specific there, then the compiler has lots of options. Again, for very simple things you could inline yourself, for more complicated things, in almost every case I've written, memory access patterns dominate performance. A few cache misses can kill you. Intel had some good references, you can skim their site for recent stuff: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ia32+performance+optimization+site%3Aintel.com Anyone have a recent Intel compiler? I know in one case I had some hand written SSE code with real clever register usage specialized for a certain wavelet transform. As I recall, the naively written general c++ code executed in about the same time- I don't remember specifically why, but most of the Vtune results, IIRC, pointed to memory limits and not instruction count.

From: Erik Reply-To: boost-users@lists.boost.org To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Container iteration macro that is equivalent to handcoded iteration? Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 01:10:07 +0200

_________________________________________________________________ Make every IM count. Download Messenger and join the i’m Initiative now. It’s free. http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/?source=TAGHM