Subject: Re: [boost] [Boost.Move] [Boost.Container] Compiling with older versions of Boost and Performance
From: Thomas Jordan (thomasjordan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-01-08 06:25:32
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 07 Jan 2012 15:58:20 +0100
> From: "Vicente J. Botet Escriba" <vicente.botet_at_[hidden]>
<snip>
> Le 07/01/12 12:10, Thomas Jordan a ?crit :
>> Hi,
>> I am interested in experimenting with v1.48 Boost.Move and
>> Boost.Container. However, I am otherwise constrained to using Boost
>> libraries v1.33.1 with
>> a Sun C++ v5.10 compiler. I couldn't seem any 'Boost library
>> dependencies' listed in the Move/Container documentation, but a quick
>> look through the header files suggests
>> that it is mainly MPL and Type Traits. So...
>> First question: would it be feasible for me to combine the headers for
>> these two libraries with the v1.33.1 libraries and get it to work (albeit
>> maybe with a little customisation), or would it be a big job/non-starter?
>> Second question - I don't see any performance analysis published for
>> Boost.Move. I know that move semantics is about more than improved
>> performance, but am interested in that side of things, especially as the
>> above compiler appears suboptimal in terms of copy elision and RVO. I am
>> wondering for example whether are there any (compiler-specific) factors
>> which could mitigate against the performance benefits of doing a move vs
>> a copy of a vector, using these libraries, for example.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> unfortunately Boost.Move and Boost.Container are not working up to now
> on Sun c++ even on trunk (1.49). See
> http://www.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/container.html.
>
> Best,
> Vicente
Thanks for pointing me to that. In general is there anything more detailed
than pass/fail available to look at?
Is the assumption that something with so many fails it not fixable one the
library side, and is not worth investigating?
Regards,
T.