At 08:16 AM 1/30/2003, David Abrahams wrote: >"Peter Dimov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> From: "David Abrahams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> Would you indulge me and try the benchmark again with the enclosed >>> shared_count patch applied and #undef BOOST_SP_USE_STD_ALLOCATOR? I >>> don't really know what's going on under the covers in the SGI >>> allocator; this is basically just the same hack I threw at the problem >>> years ago. >> >> I've taken the liberty to convert the patch into detail/quick_allocator.hpp. >> #define BOOST_SP_USE_QUICK_ALLOCATOR to make shared_ptr use it. >> shared_ptr_alloc_test.cpp has been updated, too. You can now compare >> quick_allocator vs SGI std::allocator yourself. :-) > >I'm not all set up to run those tests and measure the times, which is >why I was hoping Philippe would check it out.
It would be interesting to see the test results for intrusive_ptr as well. _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost