On 09/20/07 09:39, Achilleas Margaritis wrote:
I've done a test with boost::intrusive::list and boost::object_pool.
The boost's intrusive list is faster than mine, so I am going to use it.
But the object_pool is noticeably slower, as it is not intrusive: each time a chunk is removed from the pool, the internal table is searched, one by one, to locate the pool's entry.
When you get around to documentation, in some sort of "maintainer's guide", this information would be useful to prevent a future maintainer or someone who thinks they've got a better implementation from going down the same dead-end road. In particular, a benchmark so this "future someone" could easily test is "maybe better" implementation. It's more work, but it'd help other's and maybe yourself in the future in case boost::object_pool improves it's implementation.