10/31/2012 12:30 PM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote: > On 16/10/2012 03:50 p.m., Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote: >> On 16/10/2012 02:22 a.m., Eric Niebler wrote: >>> Hi Agustín, >>> >>> This is just a quick note to let you know that I'm currently at the >>> standard committee meeting in Portland, and that I'll be unable to look >>> until this until I get back next week. >>> >> >> Thank you for letting me know. > > For future reference, my issue was resolved at StackOverflow. You can > find it here > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/13146537/boost-proto-and-complex-transform
Heh, answered by me! Funny, I thought Bart's solution on this list had answered your question, so I didn't come back to it. > Preliminar tests for 100000000 evaluations of a simple expression `p = q > + r * 3.f` where p, q and r are geometric vectors of 3 ints give the > following promising times: > > Regular: 1.15s > Proto: 1.2s > Hand-Unrolled: 0.39s > Proto-Unrolled: 0.8s > > Proto expressions build and optimization times are not taken into > account. There is a considerable number of expression copies made by the > expression optimization that cannot be avoided by the compiler. Expression copies ... during expression evaluation? I wonder why that's necessary. > I will > continue my research by implementing a custom evaluation context that > does this optimization 'on the fly', without actually modifying the > expression. Evaluation contexts are weaker than transforms. If it can't be done with a transform, it can't be done with a context. I can't tell from the code fragment what exactly you're doing with the transforms you've written, or whether they can be improved. -- Eric Niebler BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com _______________________________________________ proto mailing list proto@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/proto
