Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote:
On 12/15/06, Gennadiy Rozental <gennadiy.rozental@thomson.com> wrote:
[snipped]
Let's say you have record with 10 optional elements. tuple based solution will end up compiling in anything from 1 to 10! different versions of the same function, while offline version will be only one. Also in case if you always want output in the same 10 column format I dont see easy way to implement it using tuples. We can take an arbitrary Fusion tuple and iterate it. Why should we be limited to a fixed number of elements?!
Also, only the templates that really get instantiated end up in the binary So if I have 100 different calls to the output function I will endup with 100 different instantiations instantiation, right? And even in case of inlining my code size would be 100 times more?
I believe that most tuple functions when inlined should occuppy almost the same as a function call, so I dont belive your estimative would be correct. With register allocation playing right, there would be less, or none, need to save registers and the results being used directly too, the whole using function could be even smaller when using the inlined one.
Fusion has some perf tests for that. They are contained in libs/fusion/example/performance. With good compilers like VC++ and Intel, the abstraction penalty is zero. In other words, there is zero overhead. You can see that by looking at the assembler code. Go check it out! Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net