Douglas Gregor wrote:
Background: Signals performance is sub-par, and much of the problem can be traced back to support for named slot groups. I'm trying to determine the best way to proceed.
Are you sure that this is the case? Last time I looked, alternatives beat Boost.Signals because they don't handle the corner cases of slot disconnection during signal invocation. Example: R operator()(void) const { typename list::iterator i = list_.begin(); while (i != list_.end()) { if (i->function_) { (i++)->function_(); } else { i = list_.erase(i); } } } (from Jody Hagins's implementation) AFAICS this doesn't work if (i++)->function_() disconnects *(i+1). To handle disconnection correctly, one needs to invoke a temporary list<>. I haven't looked at what boost::signal does, but this may account for the dynamic allocations that have been reported. Of course named slot groups may introduce additional overhead, I don't know.