Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
"David Abrahams" <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:87irgdxafy.fsf@pereiro.luannocracy.com...
"Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental@thomson.com> writes:
"Gennadiy Rozental" <gennadiy.rozental@thomson.com> writes: Just that after many years of optimizing
"David Abrahams" <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:87psal1e9x.fsf@pereiro.luannocracy.com... performance critical code I gave up doing any "estimations". I was proven wrong too many times, so that even test program is not real prove. There are way too many factors that affect performance of real-life applications. Sometimes the same code compiled with different compilers of in different hardware will exhibit completely different performance pattern. We could talk about trends. And in this case I believe trends could be different depending on circumstances. That's true in most cases, but there's no need to muddy this case with uncertainties. If you think about it for just a few moments, you'll see there's absolutely no way the tuple version could be worse, and that it would take an optimizer of unheralded brilliance to make the variant version as good.
Let's just say that we'll have agree to disagree ;)
Please see my other post. You must have missed this reply to your post when fusion was being reviewed. I've done lots of tests for variant. It's not as optimal as you think, alas :( Mind you, I hoped variant would be as fast as it can too because I rely on it in spirit2. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net