4 Sep
2011
4 Sep
'11
12:22 p.m.
On 09/04/2011 02:42 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
the issues with the performance of boost::function are
reasonably well
known and were well documented in the article that florian linked to,
along with a much better performing drop-in replacement.
Correction: It wasn't me ;D It was Pedro Alves who posted that link. I
was not aware of these performance issues. And in my usecase they are
irrelevant, so I'll stick with boost::function. For other designs it
might be worth reconsidering though..
Flo