Hi, there,

Thanks for you guys help. I think I have reached the answer I wanted. So I'd like to explain why there are performance issues with C++11 in boost::function.

First of all, I wanna reply the guys who give me hints.

>> What if you try with just 1 integer? Does the difference in time stay proportionally the same?

There won't be big differences if there is just 1 integer. So this proofs that it could be a memory copy problem.

>> I'd run the example code through Callgrind (valgrind --tool=callgrind)

>> and then compare the reports in KCachegrind. This should at least give

>> you an idea of the source of the problem.

You are right. I ran callgrind, and it showed some interesting things. If I compiled without C++11, it shows the most hot spot is "wordcopy_fwd_align". Otherwise, the most hotspot is "boost::bind" and there is no records for wordcopy_fwd_align. I think that means if we dont' use C++11, there will be some memory copy optimizations.

>> Maybe trying another compiler would help you obtain your "proof".

>> How about intel compiler?

>> It also has the "-std=c++11" flag, so, if it is a compiler issue it will be clear.

As you suggested, I tried Intel compiler. It's great. The data shows there is no performance differences between with or without C++11 in boost::function. That proofs your guess that it's a compiler issue.

So here is my conclusion, there won't be memory copy optimization when using (C++11, boost::function, gcc4.9/clang3.4). But Intel compiler does well to do C++11 related optimizations.

Thanks

Athrun


At 2014-07-05 11:32:21, "Seeger, Steven D. (GSFC-444.0)[Embedded Flight Systems, Inc]" <steven.seeger@nasa.gov> wrote:
>>Right, there are 1000 integers in the vector. If something, say STL, is bottleneck for boost::bind with C++ 11, it >should also be a bottleneck without C++11. And they should have the same performance. However, the fact shows >that C++11 mode has some additional overhead. I wanna figure that out.
>
>What if you try with just 1 integer? Does the difference in time stay proportionally the same?
>
>Steven
>_______________________________________________
>Boost-users mailing list
>Boost-users@lists.boost.org
>http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users