20 Jul
2005
20 Jul
'05
7:53 p.m.
On 7/18/05, Peder Holt <peder.holt@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/17/05, Cromwell Enage <sponage@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
The algorithm behind string_c_to_double is not very efficient, so if anyone has a better idea for an implementation, feel free to contribute :)
<snip> I just updated the vault with a new and heavily improved version of string_c_to_double, which compiles much faster than the original one. It builds up the number using compile time constants, and iterates through the literals in the string using BOOST_PP macros. Compile time of the conforming string_c_to_double now matches the compile time of the non-conforming BOOST_DOUBLE macro. Regards Peder Holt