Re: [boost] Performance test of shared_ptr, ptr_vector, cow_ptr, and copy_ptr

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-10 11:25:34

David Maisonave wrote:

> I believe the performance hit is coming from having to call new on the
> constructor.  I'm wondering if there's a more efficient way to do
> reference counting that can avoid calling new.

Well... there are

1. intrusive_ptr
2. #define BOOST_SP_USE_QUICK_ALLOCATOR
3. dlmalloc
4. not calling reserve to make copy_ptr look worse :-)