Message du 03/04/11 19:49 De : "Lorenzo Caminiti" A : boost@lists.boost.org Copie à : Objet : Re: [boost] [local] Help for the Alternatives section
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Lorenzo Caminiti wrote:
I have done an (hopefully more correct) benchmark of Boost.Local performances compared with the alternative methods -- please check my doing :)
In summary: 1) Boost.Phoenix, global functors, and local functors run in ~15s. 2) Boost.Lambda runs in ~40s. 3) Boost.Local runs in ~53s. 4) I don't have a C++0x lambda compiler so I could not benchmark C++0x lambdas.
With these timings it seems to me that you will be forced to provide two macro families: one that doesn't use the trick and can be used as template parameter only on compilers supporting this C++0x feature and the other which uses the trick is slow but can be used in a portable way as a template parameter. I guess that this benchmark shows a hard limitation of Boost.Local at least until most of the compilers will accept local structures as template parameters. Best, Vicente