"Robert Ramey" <ramey@rrsd.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
"Robert Ramey" <ramey@rrsd.com> writes:
Why should anyone still use the other version? To save the compile time for 5 lines of code?
LOL - believe me, someone will want to do it differently. I can't say how or why - but believe me it will happen. The adaptor approach lets everyone add their own thing and lets everyone else pick and choose which combination of things they want to add.
IIUC, you currently have some default implmentation that's 10x slower than the one Matthias is proposing. Is there any good reason that the fast implementation shouldn't be the default?
The current implemenation is universal. The fast ... archive will only make a difference on those collections whose storage is contiguous.
I don't care if the fast archive doesn't make things faster in some cases as long as it always works. Does it fail to work for some collections?
Its not even clear to to me that std::vector is storage is guarenteed to be contiguouse.
It is. http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-defects.html#69
Its not clear that its even applicable to archives other than native binary
Basically Mattias enhancement is an exploitation of a special cases. That's actually a very good idea. But that's not the same replace of the general solution with something more intricate and more fragil -
I can't parse that. "That's not the same replace of the general solution...?"
at no improvment in performance.
No improvement in performance? Huh? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com